national its program plan, volume i

NATIONAL ITS PROGRAM PLANINTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS

VOLUME I

EDITED BY

GARY W. EULER FIRST EDITIONH. DOUGLAS ROBERTSON March 1995

101521

NATIONAL ITS PROGRAM PLAN

VOLUME I

FIRST EDITIONMARCH 1995

Edited by:

Gary W. EulerJoint Program Office for ITSUnited States Department of Transportation

H. Douglas RobertsonPlans and ProgramsITS America

Abstract

The purpose of the National ITS Program Plan is to guide the development and deploymentof Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) in the United States. This, the First Edition of thePlan was a joint effort of ITS America and the United States Department of Transportation.The plan was developed through a consensus building process which sought the involvementof the entire ITS community. The National ITS Program Plan consists of four documents: anExecutive Summary, a Synopsis, and two Volumes. The Executive Summary provides a verybrief overview of the goals, objectives, and recommendations presented in the National ITSProgram Plan. The Synopsis provides a fifty page encapsulation of the major subject areaswithin the document, with special emphasis on the area of deployment. Volume I focuses onthe issues of goals, compatibility, deployment, and program assessment, and Volume IIcontains detailed descriptions and plans for each of the twenty-nine user services.

For copies of this report contact:

ITS America400 Virginia Avenue, S.W., Suite 800Washington, D.C. 20024U.S.A.Telephone: (202) 484-FAX: (202) 484-3483

Price:Prices for members and non-members, listed below, are based on recovery of printingand distribution costs.

Members Complete Set $35.00 eachSynopsis $10.00 eachExecutive Summary $ 5.00 each

Non-members Complete Set $40.00 eachSynopsis $15.00 eachExecutive Summary $ 5.00 each

Prepayment is required. An order form is included at the end of the document. Contact ITSAmerica for availability in electronic format.

This document was produced, in part, with funding provided by the U.S. Department ofTransportation, Contract Number DTFH61-94-R-00076.

I - NATIONAL ITS PROGRAM PLAN PREFACE

PREFACE

This, the First Edition of the National ITS Program Plan was a joint effort of ITS Americaand the United States Department of Transportation. The plan was developed through aconsensus building process which sought the involvement of the entire ITS community. Over36 individuals participated actively as authors, and well over two hundred individuals from awide range of organizations critiqued, commented, and otherwise contributed substantially tothe material presented here.

The National ITS Program Plan consists of four documents: an Executive Summary, aSynopsis, and two Volumes. The Executive Summary provides a very brief overview of thegoals, objectives, and recommendations presented in the National ITS Program Plan. TheSynopsis provides a fifty page encapsulation of the major subject areas within the document,with special emphasis on the area of deployment. Volume I focuses on the goals of ITS,compatibility, deployment, and program assessment. Volume II contains detailed descriptionsand plans for each of the twenty nine user services.

Work on the National ITS Program Plan formally commenced in June of 1993. The Secondand Final Drafts of the Plan, completed in May 1994 and November 1994 respectively,incorporated the comments and contributions of a substantial number of individuals andorganizations. In total, more than 4,000 draft copies of the plan were distributed to ITSAmerica members, U.S. DOT staff, and the general public through the Federal Registerprocess. Over 200 individuals and organizations commented and provided input for one ormore of the drafts.

,

The process of developing the National ITS Program Plan was, in itself, a valuable exercise.The focus of the first draft was upon the creation of the user service development plans nowcontained in Volume II. The remainder of the draft consisted largely of annotated outlines.A Joint Writing Team (JWT) was formed and given the responsibility of developing thePlan. In the second draft, the deployment and deployment considerations chapters took shape,and with the third draft, deployment scenarios emerged. Each draft represented significantadvances in our thinking about ITS technology, systems, deployments, and impacts.

Overall guidance to the JWT on the direction and structure of the Plan was provided by U.S.DOT officials and the ITS Planning Committee of ITS America. The Joint Writing Team, co-chaired by Doug Robertson (ITS America) and Gary Euler (US DOT ITS Joint ProgramOffice), consisted of ITS America and U.S. DOT staff and ITS America members. The JWTmembers, acknowledged by name and organization below, worked extensively with ITSAmerica members, U.S. DOT staff, and the general public with a goal of insuring balancedrepresentation of the goals, objectives, concerns, and needs of a diverse ITS Community.

111

I - NATIONAL ITS PROGRAM PLAN PREFACE

The field of ITS is advancing rapidly on many fronts; keeping abreast of it will require acontinuing effort. This document will serve as the basis for periodic updates, which willprovide information on current activities and projections for the future. Prior to thepublication of the Plan, the U.S. DOT has undertaken an initiative to examine the role ofgovernment in all aspects of transportation. The results of this initiative may affect the plan.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

A substantial number of individuals contributed to the content of this document. Themembers of the ITS America Planning Committee, participating U.S. DOT officials, and theJoint Writing team are listed with their affiliations below. The names and organizations ofover two hundred individuals who reviewed and commented on one or more drafts of the Planare listed in Appendix A.

The ITS AMERICA Planning Committee

Members of the ITS America Planning Committee, chaired by Thomas Deen, TRB (retired),include*:

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Mike Bolton, Capital MTA, TX;Dick Braun, University of Minnesota;Sadler Bridges, Texas Transp. Institute;Morgan Buchner, American Telephoneand Telegraph;August Burgett, US DOT - NHTSA;Jim Costantino, ITS AMERICA;Randy Doi, Motorola;Hank Dittmar, STPP;Gary Euler, U.S. DOT- ITS JointProgram Office;Gene Farber, Ford Motor Company;Dennis Foderberg, University ofMinnesota;John Grubba, Oakland CountyGovernment, Michigan;Dave Hensing, AASHTO;Les Jacobson, Washington State DOT;Don Kelly, Kentucky DOT;Hal Kassoff, Maryland DOT;Dick Landis, HELP, Inc.;

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Joel Markowitz, Oakland MTC;Paul Marx, US DOT - FTA;Cindi Moreland, Motorola;Gene Ofstead, Minnesota DOT;Donald Orne, TRW/ESL;Bob Parsons, Parsons Transportation;Bill Powers, Ford Motor Company;Jim Rillings, General Motors Corp.;Doug Robertson, ITS AMERICA;Bill Spreitzer, General Motors;John Stearns, NavTech;Steve Shladover, University ofCalifornia;Philip Shucet, Michael Baker, Inc.;Ross Sorci, IIT Research Institute;Phil Tarnoff, Farradyne Systems, Inc.;Richard Tippie, National SafetyCouncil;Andre Vits, The European Commission;Pat Waller, University of Michigan;Rick Weiland, SE1 Technology Group.

* The individuals listed served on the committee during the development of the plan.

iv

I - NATIONAL ITS PROGRAM PLAN

Participating U.S. DOT Officials

PREFACE

l Christine Johnson, Director ITS Joint Program Officel Steve Crane, FHWA, CVO Task Forcel Ron Fisher, Director, FTA, Office of Training, Research, and Rural Transportationl Susan Lauffer, Director, FHWA Office of Traffic Management and ITS Applicationsl Bill Leasure, Director, NHTSA Office of Crash Avoidancel Claire Orth, FRA, Equipment and Operating Practices Research Divisionl Lyle Saxton, Director, FHWA Office of Safety and Traffic Operations R&D

The Joint Writing: Team (JWT)

Gary Euler of the U.S. DOT ITS Joint Program Office and Doug Robertson of ITS Americaserved as Co-chairs of the Joint Writing Team. The members of the team (in alphabeticalorder) include:

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Nancy Anderson, TRW;Bob Arden, Bellcore;Wayne Berman, US DOT -FHWA;Chris Body, ITS-A;August Burgett, US DOT -NHTSA;Kan Chen, University of Michigan;Jim Dann, US DOT - OST;Cindy Elliot, US DOT-JPO;Mike Freitas, US DOT - FHWA;Charles Goodman, US DOT - FHWA;Cliff Heise, Rockwell;Tom Horan, George Mason University;Tom Jacobs, US DOT - FHWA;Steve Johnson, ITS-A;Barney Legge, JPL;Jeff Loftus, US DOT - FHWA;Wes Lum, California Department of .Transportation;

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Shelley Lynch, US DOT - JPO;Bill McCartney, Michael Baker, Jr;Donna Nelson, ITS-A;John Pappas, Houston Metro;Sean Ricketson, US DOT - FTA;Craig Roberts, ITS-A;Beverly Russell,US DOT - JPO;Ken Sakamoto, Sumitomo Electric;K.K. Saxena, Kimley-Horn, Associates;Mike Schagrin, US DOT -JPO;Dwight Shank, Mitre;Sig Silber, Sig Silber and Associates;Bill Stevens, Mitre;Charlie Velez, TRESP;Toni Wilbur, US DOT - JPO.

I - NATIONAL ITS PROGRAM PLAN CONTENTS

CONTENTS

VOLUME I

PREFACE. . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 111

ACKNOWLEGEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv

CHAPTER1.02.03.04.05.0

CHAPTER1.02.0

3.0

4.0

5.06.0

I . NATIONAL ITS PROGRAM PLAN OVERVIEW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1THE IVHS STRATEGIC PLANS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2PURPOSE OF THE NATIONAL ITS PROGRAM PLAN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3FEATURES OF THE NATIONAL ITS PROGRAM PLAN . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4ORGANIZATION OF THE NATIONAL ITS PROGRAM PLAN . . . . . . . . . 5

II- ORIGINS OF THE NATIONAL ITS PROGRAM. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7WHY DO WE NEED TO CHANGE? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

2.1 Accessibility and Mobility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72.2 Dependence on the Single Occupant Vehicle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72.3 Land Use and Demographics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82.4 Economics and Productivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82.5 International Competitiveness .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82.6 Changes in Defense Industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92.7 The National Information Infrastructure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92.8 Fiscal Pressures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92.9 The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 . . . . . . 92.10 The Clean Air Act Amendments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

GOALS AND OBJECTIVES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113.1 Improve Safety . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113.2 Increase Operational Efficiency and Capacity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123.3 Reduce Energy and Environmental Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133.4 Enhance Present and Future Productivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143.5 Enhance the Personal Mobility, Convenience and Comfort . . . . . . . 153.6 Support Developmentof ITS Industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

THE NATIONAL ITS PROGRAM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164.1 Research and Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164.2 Operational Tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164.3 National ITS Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174.4 Standards and Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184.5 Supporting ITS Deployment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

KEY PARTICIPANTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18THE PROGRAM PLANNING PROCESS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

vii


CONTENTS

CHAPTER IIII. USER SERVICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221.0 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222.0 USER SERVICE DESCRIPTIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223.0 USER SERVICE BUNDLING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233.1 Travel and Transportation Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

3.2 Travel Demand Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 273.3 Public Transportation Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 283.4 Electronic Payment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 303.5 Commercial Vehicle Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 303.6 Emergency Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 333.7 Advanced Vehicle Control and Safety Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

4.0 USER SERVICE DEVELOPMENT PLANS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 355.0 CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

CHAPTER IV - NATIONAL COMPATIBILITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 381.0 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 382.0 NATIONAL ITS ARCHITECTURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

2.1 Program Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 382.1.1 Phase I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 392.1.2 Phase II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 402.1.3 The Need for Consensus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 412.1.4 The End Product .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

3.0 STANDARDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 423.1 Standards-Setting Organization Roles, Relationships, and Activities . . 42

3.1 .1 Transportation Agencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 423.1.2 Utilized Federal Advisory Committee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 433.1.3 National Laboratories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 433.1.4 Standards Developing Organizations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

3.2 Standards-Setting Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 464.0 TELECOMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

4.1 ITS Telecommunications Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 474.1 .1 Telecommunications Techniques . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 474.1.2 Fixed and Mobile Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 484.1.3 One-Way and Two-Way Communications . . . . . . . . . . . . . 494.1.4 Short Range and Wide Area Communications . . . . . . . . . . 50

4.2 ITS Telecommunications Technology Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 514.3 Organizational Roles and Responsibilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

4.3.1 Domestic Spectrum Management Organizations . . . . . . . . . 534.3.2 International Spectrum Management Organizations . . . . . . . 534.3.3 Utilized Federal Advisory Committee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 534.3.4 Public-Private Partnerships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

. . .viii


CONTENTS

4.4 ITS Telecommunications and the National Information Infrastructure . 554.5 Telecommunications System Deployment Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 554.6 RF Spectrum Acquisition Strategy and Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56

5.0 CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58

CHAPTER V . USER SERVICES INTEGRATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 591.0 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 592.0 DEPLOYMENT PLANNING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

2.1 Participants and Partnerships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 592.2 Decentralized Deployment Decisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 612.3 Private Sector Business Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61

3.0 USER SERVICES INTEGRATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 613.1 Functional Relationships Among User Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 623.2 Using the Functional Relationships Tool . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69

4.0 FUNCTIONAL RISK ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 714.1 Deployment Risk Assessment Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75

5.0 CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76

CHAPTER VI - DEPLOYMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 791.0 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 792.0 EXISTING ITS DEPLOYMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 .3.0 A DEPLOYMENT VISION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 .

3.1 5-Year Vision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 853.2 10-Year Vision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 873.3 20-Year and Beyond Deployment Vision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89

4.0 CHARACTERIZATION OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE INVOLVEMENT . . 894.1 Public Sector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 894.2 Private Sector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 914.3 Involvement Schemes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92

5.0 ITS ISSUES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 925.1 Issue: Sources of Funding - Operation and Maintenance Funding .. . . 925.2 Issue: Extent of Deployment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 945.3 Issue: Achievement of Public Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 965.4 Issue: Market Stimulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 975.5 Issue: Interagency Cooperation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 985.6 Issue: Privacy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 985.7 Issue: Deployment Cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 995.8 Issue: Relationship of ITS to Other/Non-Transportation Services . . . 1005.9 Issue: Effect on State and Local Choice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101

6.0 CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102

ix


CONTENTS

CHAPTER VII . DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1071.0 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1072.0 THE NEAR-TERM CHALLENGES - MAKING A DIFFERENCE SOON . . 107

2.1 Issue: Sensor Infrastructure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1082.2 Issue: Lack of Nationally Accepted Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1092.3 Issue: Market Uncertainty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1102.4 Issue: Operations and Maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1112.5 Issue: Privacy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1112.6 Issue: Liability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1132.7 Issue: Partnerships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114

3.0 LONG-TERM CHALLENGES . AN OVERVIEW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1153.1 Organizational and Cultural Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1163.2 Partnerships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1173.3 Procurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1193.4 Environmental Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1203.5 Legal Implications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1213.6 Outreach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1233.7 Market Uncertainty and Risk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1243.8 Societal Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126

4.0 CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128

.

CHAPTER VIII - PROGRAM ASSESSMENT 129 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.0 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1292.0 ASSESSMENT FEATURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1293.0 ASSESSMENT APPROACH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131

3.1 Evaluation Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1313.2 Evaluation Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1343.3 Information Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136

4.0 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN FOR ASSESSMENT ACTIVITIES . . . . . . . . . 1385.0 OUTPUTS OF PROGRAM ASSESSMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139

5.1 Assessment Reports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1395.2 Implications for NPP Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1395.3 Implications for Public and Private Sector Investment Decisions . . . . 139

6.0 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1396.1 The U.S. Department of Transportation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1396.2 ITS America . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1406.3 Other Public and Private Sector Organizations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140

7.0 CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140


CONTENTS

A P P E N D I C E S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141A.B.C.D.E.F.G.

TABLES2-l3-l4-l5-l5-45-56-28-3B-lC-lD-l

FIGURES4-25-25-36-l6-36-46-58-18-28-4

Plan Reviewers and Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142Operational Tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146Mapping of User Services to Goals and Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149ITS RF Spectrum Requirements Matrix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161Deployment Support Activities Schedule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190Glossary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195

Program Planning Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21User Service Bundles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24Standards Developing Organizations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45Function Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64Risk Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73Risk Assessment Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76Examples of Current ITS Deployments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84Evaluation Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134Examples of Operational Tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146Mapping of User Services to ITS Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150ITS RF Spectrum Requirements Matrix 162 .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Examples of ITS Telecommunications Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50Functional Relationships Among User Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65Marginal Additional Investment Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70Deployment Today . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 815-Year Deployment Vision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8610-Year Deployment Vision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88ITS Participant Involvement Schemes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93Framework for Program Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130Assessment Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132Program Assessment Matrix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137

E-l Deployment Support Activities Schedule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187

xi

NATIONAL ITS PROGRAM PLAN VOLUME II - CONTENTS

CONTENTS

VOLUME II

PREFACE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii

OVERVIEW - USER SERVICE DEVELOPMENT PLANS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.0 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.0 The User Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.0 User Service Development Plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24.0 User Service Bundling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25.0 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

CHAPTER 1.0 - TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . 51.0. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

1.0.1 User Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51.0.2 Bundling the Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61.0.3 Relationship to ITS Goals and Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71.0.4 Cross-Cutting Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 .0.5 Technology Development Timeline Charts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

1.1 EN-ROUTE DRIVER INFORMATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.1 .1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.1.2 Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.1.3 Service Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.1.4 Operational Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.1.5 Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.1.6 Potential Costs and Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.1.7 Assessment of Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.1.8 Milestones and Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1313 .13 141515161719

1.2 ROUTE GUIDANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.2.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.2.2 Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.2.3 Service Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.2.4 Operational Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.2.5 Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.2.6 Potential Costs and Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.2.7 Assessment of Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.2.8 Milestones and Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

272727282829303032

xii


CONTENTS(Volume II)

1.3 TRAVELER SERVICES INFORMATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 371.3.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 371.3.2 Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 371.3.3 Service Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 381.3.4 Operational Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 381.3.5 Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 391.3.6 Potential Costs and Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 391.3.7 Assessment of Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 401.3.8 Milestones and Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

1.4 TRAFFIC CONTROL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.4.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.4.2 Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.4.3 Service Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.4.4 Operational Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.4.5 Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.4.6 Potential Costs and Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.4.7 Assessment of Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.4.8 Milestones and Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

464647474849505153

1.5 INCIDENT MANAGEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.5.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.5.2 Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.5.3 Service Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.5.4 Operational Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.5.5 Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.5.6 Potential Costs and Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.5.7 Assessment of Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.5.8 Milestones and Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

646464646668696971

1.6 EMISSIONS TESTING AND MITIGATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.6.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.6.2 Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.6.3 Service Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.6.4 Operational Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.6.5 Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.6.6 Relationship to IVHS Goals and Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.6.7 Potential Costs and Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.6.8 Assessment of Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.6.9 Milestones and Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

77777777787879798081

xiii


CONTENTS(Volume-II)

CHAPTER 2.0 . TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 872.0 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87

2.0.1 User Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 872.0.2 Bundling the Travel Demand Management User Services . . . . . . . . . . . 882.0.3 Relationship to ITS Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 892.0.4 Cross-Cutting Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 902.0.5 Technology Development Timeline Charts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90

2.1 DEMAND MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 932.1 .1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 932.1.2 Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 942.1.3 Service Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 942.1.4 Operational Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 952.1.5 Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 972.1.6 Potential Costs and Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 982.1.7 Assessment of Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 992.1.8 Milestones and Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101

2.2. PRE-TRIP TRAVEL INFORMATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1062.2.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1062.2.2 Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1062.2.3 Service Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1072.2.4 Operational Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1072.2.5 Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1082.2.6 Potential Costs and Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1092.2.7 Assessment of Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1102.2.8 Milestones and Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111

2.3 RIDE MATCHING AND RESERVATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2.3.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2.3.2 Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2.3.3 Service Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2.3.4 Operational Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2.3.5 Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2.3.6 Potential Costs and Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2.3.7 Assessment of Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2.3.8 Milestones and Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

116116116117117118119119121

xiv


CONTENTS(Volume II)

CHAPTER 3.0 . PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION OPERATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1253.0 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125

3.0.1 User Service Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1253.0.2 Relationship to ITS Goals and Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1263.0.3 Integration of Public Transportation Management User Services . . . . . . 1273.0.4 Public Transportation Management Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1283.0.5 Cross-cutting Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1283.0.6 Activities Chart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128

3.1 PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1303.1 .1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1303.1.2 Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1303.1.3 Service Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1303.1.4 Operational Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1303.1.5 Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1323.1.6 Potential Costs and Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1333.1.7 Assessment of Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1353.1.8 Milestones and Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137

3.2 EN-ROUTE TRANSIT INFORMATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1403.2.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1403.2.2 Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1403.2.3 Service Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1413.2.4 Operational Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1413.2.5 Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1423.2.6 Potential Costs and Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1433.2.7 Assessment of Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1433.2.8 Milestones and Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145

3.3 PERSONALIZED PUBLIC TRANSIT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1503.3.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1503.3.2 Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1503.3.3 Service Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1503.3.4 Operational Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1513.3.5 Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1523.3.6 Potential Costs and Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1533.3.7 Assessment of Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1543.3.8 Milestones and Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156

xv


CONTENTS(Volume II)

3.4 PUBLIC TRAVEL SECURITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1603.4.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1603.4.2 Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1603.4.3 Service Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1613.4.4 Operational Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1613.4.5 Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1613.4.6 Potential Costs and Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1633.4.7 Assessment of Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1633.4.8 Milestones and Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165

CHAPTER 4.0 . ELECTRONIC PAYMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1674.0 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167

4.0.1 Relationship to ITS Goals and Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1674.0.2 Integration of Electronic Payment User Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1684.0.3 Electronic Payment Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1684.0.4 Cross-cutting Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1684.05 Activities Chart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169

4.1 ELECTRONIC PAYMENT SERVICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1714.1.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1714.1.2 Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171 .4.1.3 Service Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1714.1.4 Operational Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1724.1.5 Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1744.1.6 Potential Costs and Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1764.1.7 Assessment of Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1774.1.8 Milestones and Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179

CHAPTER 5.0 . COMMERCIAL VEHICLE OPERATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1825.0 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182

5.0.1 CVO User Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1825.0.2 Integration of CVO User Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1845.0.3 Safety in the CVO user services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1845.0.4 CVO System Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1855.0.5 Goals and Objectives of CVO User Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1865.0.6 Cross-cutting Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1875.0.7 Milestones and Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1905.0.7.1 Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190

xvi


CONTENTS(Volume II)

5.1 COMMERCIAL VEHICLE ELECTRONIC CLEARANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1995.1 .1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1995.1.2 Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2005.1.3 Service Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2015.1.4 Operational Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2025.1.5 Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2025.1.6 Potential Costs and Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2035.1.7 Assessment of Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204

5.2 AUTOMATED ROADSIDE SAFETY INSPECTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2075.2.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2075.2.2 Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2085.2.3 Service Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2085.2.4 Operational Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2095.2.5 Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2095.2.6 Potential Costs And Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2105.2.7 Assessment of Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210

5.3 ON-BOARD SAFETY MONITORING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2125.3.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212 .5.3.2 Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2125.3.3 Service Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 135.3.4 Operational Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2135.3.5 Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2145.3.6 Potential Costs and Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2155.3.7 Assessment of Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216

5.4 COMMERCIAL VEHICLE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESSES . . . . . . . . . . 2185.4.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2185.4.2 Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2185.4.3 Service Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2195.4.4 Operational Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2205.4.5 Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2215.4.6 Potential Costs and Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2215.4.7 Assessment of Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222

5.5 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS INCIDENT RESPONSE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2245.5 .1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2245.5.2 Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2245.5.3 Service Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225

xvii


CONTENTS(Volume II)

5.5.4 Operational Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2255.5.5 Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2255.5.6 Potential Costs and Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2255.5.7 Assessment of Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226

5.6 FREIGHT MOBILITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2285.6.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2285.6.2 Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2285.6.3 Service Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2295.6.4 Operational Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2295.6.5 Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2295.6.6 Potential Costs and Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2305.6.7 Assessment of Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230

CHAPTER 6.0 . EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2316.0 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231

6.0.1 Emergency Management User Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2316.0.2 Relationship to ITS Goals and Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2326.0.3 Interaction With Other User Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2336.0.4 Activities and Chart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233

6.1 EMERGENCY NOTIFICATION AND PERSONAL SECURITY . . . . . . . . 235

6.1 .l Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2356.1.2 Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2356.1.3 Service Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2366.1.4 Operational Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2376.1.5 Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2406.1.6 Potential Costs and Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2416.1.7 Assessment of Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2436.1.8 Milestones and Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 244

6.2 EMERGENCY VEHICLE MANAGEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 250

6.2.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2506.2.2 Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2506.2.3 Service Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2506.2.4 Operational Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2526.2.5 Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2536.2.6 Potential Costs and Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2536.2.7 Assessment of Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2546.2.8 Milestones and Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255

.xviii


CONTENTS(Volume II)

CHAPTER 7.0 . ADVANCED VEHICLE CONTROL AND SAFETY SYSTEMS . . . . . 2597.0 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 259

7.0.1 Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2607.0.2 Service Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2617.0.3 Operational Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2627.0.4 Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2657.0.5 The NHTSA ITS Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2687.0.6 Potential Costs and Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2697.0.7 Assessment of Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269

7.1 LONGITUDINAL COLLISION AVOIDANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2717.1 .1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 17.1.2 Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2717.1.3 Service Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2727.1.4 Operational Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2727.1.5 Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2747.1.6 Potential Costs and Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2757.1.7 Assessment of Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2757.1.8 Milestones and Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 278

7.2 LATERAL COLLISION AVOIDANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 283 .7.2.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2837.2.2 Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2837.2.3 Service Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2847.2.4 Operational Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2847.2.5 Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2857.2.6 Potential Costs and Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2867.2.7 Assessment of Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2877.2.8 Milestones and Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 289

7.3 INTERSECTION COLLISION AVOIDANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2947.3.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2947.3.2 Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2947.3.3 Service Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2947.3.4 Operational Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2957.3.5 Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2957.3.6 Potential Costs and Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2977.3.7 Assessment of Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2977.3.8 Milestones and Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 299

xix


CONTENTS(Volume II)

7.4 VISION ENHANCEMENT FOR CRASH AVOIDANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3037.4.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3037.4.2 Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3037.4.3 Service Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3037.4.4 Operational Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3047.4.5 Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3047.4.6 Potential Costs and Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3057.4.7 Assessment of Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3067.4.8 Milestones and Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 307

7.5 SAFETY READINESS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3117.5.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 117.5.2 Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3117.5.3 Service Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 127.5.4 Operational Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3127.5.5 Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3147.5.6 Potential Costs and Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3157.5.7 Assessment of Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3167.5.8 Milestones and Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 319

7.6 PRE-CRASH RESTRAINT DEPLOYMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 322 .7.6.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3227.6.2 Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3227.6.3 Service Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3227.6.4 Operational Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3237.6.5 Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3237.6.6 Potential Costs and Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3257.6.7 Assessment of Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3257.6.8 Milestones and Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 327

7.7 AUTOMATED HIGHWAY SYSTEM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3307.7.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3307.7.2 Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3307.7.3 Service Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3317.7.4 Operational Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3327.7.5 Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3367.7.6 Potential Costs and Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3367.7.7 Assessment of Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3377.7.8 Milestones and Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 338

xx


CONTENTS(Volume II)

LIST OF TABLES - VOLUME II1.0 User Service Bundles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .41.0-l Travel and Transportation Management User Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52.0-l Travel Demand Management User Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 886.0-2 Police Reported Motor Vehicle Accidents in the U.S., 1993 . . . . . . . . . . 2607.1-1 Assessment of Roles for Longitudinal Collision Avoidance Systems . . . . . 2787.2-l Assessment of Roles for Lateral Collision Avoidance Systems . . . . . . . . . 2897.3-l Assessment of Roles for Intersection Collision Avoidance Systems . . . . , 2997.5-l Assessment of Roles for Safety Readiness Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 318

LIST OF FIGURES - VOLUME II1.0--21 .o-31.1-11.2-11.4-11.5-11.6-12.0-22.1-12.2-l2.3-l3.0-l4.0-l5.0-l5.0-26.0-l6.1-16.2- 17.0-l7.0-27.1-27.2-27.3-27.4-l7.5-l7.6-l7.6-l

Travel Management Technology Development Timelinee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11Transportation Management Technology Development Timeline . . . . . . . . 12En-Route Driver Information Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20Route Guidance Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33Traffic Control Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54Incident Management Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72Emission Testing and Mitigation Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82Travel Demand Management Technology Development Timelinee . . . . . . . . 92Demand Management and Operations Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 .Pre-trip Travel Information Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112Ride Matching and Reservation Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122Public Transportation Operations Technology Timeline Chart . . . . . . . . . 129Electronic Payment Technology Timeline Chart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170CVO Gantt Chart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191CVO Technology Timeline Chart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194Emergency Management Technology Timeline Chart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234Emergency Notification and Personal Security Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . 245Emergency Vehicle Management Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256Time-Intensity Graph of Pre-Crash Avoidance Requirements . . . . . . . . . . 264Advanced Vehicle Safety Systems Technology Timeline Chart . . . . . . . . 266Longitudinal Collision Avoidance Gantt Chart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266Lateral Collision Avoidance Gantt Chart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 290Intersection Collision Avoidance Gantt Chart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300Vision Enhancement for Crash Avoidance Gantt Chart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 308Safety Readiness Gantt Chart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 320Pre-Crash Restraint Gantt Chart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 328Automated Highway System Gantt Chart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 339

xxi

I - NATIONAL ITS PROGRAM PLAN CHAPTER I - OVERVIEW

CHAPTER I - NATIONAL ITS PROGRAM PLAN OVERVIEW

“We envision, during the next 20 years, the implementation of a national ITS program,comparable in scope to the Interstate Highway System, with major participation by the private andpublic sectors. The primary focus of such a program is the creation of a truly balancedtransportation system that includes the following:

A national system of travel-support technology,(including computers, communications,information and systems technology) operating consistently and seamlessly from mode to modeand from state to state to promote the safe, expeditious, environmentally acceptable, and economicmovement of goods and people.

A system that encompasses mobility and accessibility for urban, suburban, and ruraltransportation users. .

A new level of cooperation and commitment between the public and private sectors to deliverthe systems and create the infrastructure that will implement a mobility revolution.

A vigorous U.S. ITS industry supplying both domestic and international needs.

A safe, efficient surface transportation system that complements and intemcts smoothly amongair, transit, rail, maritime, and highway operations.”

Adapted from: The IVHS America Strategic Plan for Intelligent Vehicle-Highway Systems in theUnited States and the United States Department of Transportation IVHS Strategic Plan.

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Surface transportation in the United States faces a number of challenges. Despite the fact thatthe United States has one of the best roadway systems in the world, mobility is declining andsafety remains a serious problem. Congestion takes its toll in lost productivity, costing thenation an estimated $100 billion each year. Traffic accidents represent another $70 billion incosts, not including the loss of life or consequences of long-term injury. Inefficientmovement of vehicles reduces productivity, wastes energy, increases emissions, and threatensthe quality of life we enjoy. Transportation is vital to the social and economic health of thenation. The efficiency and effectiveness of surface transportation has direct impacts oneconomic growth, land use, competitiveness, and accessibility to health care and socialservices.

1


Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS), formerly called Intelligent Vehicle-Highway Systems(IVHS), provide tools that can assist us in addressing these problems as well as anticipate andaddress future demands through an intermodal, strategic approach to transportation. ITSapplies advanced and emerging technologies in such fields as information processing,communications, control, and electronics to surface transportation needs. If these technologiesare effectively integrated and deployed, there could be a number of benefits including moreefficient use of our infrastructure and energy resources, and significant improvements insafety, mobility, accessibility, and productivity.

The National ITS Program Plan (NPP) provides a comprehensive planning reference for theapplication of intelligent transportation systems. It illustrates how the goals of privateindustry, transportation users, and federal, state, and local government can be addressedthrough the development and deployment of ITS. It provides guidance for those who areconsidering or have proceeded with the development and deployment of ITS by making themaware of the background, issues, considerations and requirements associated with a nationallycompatible, intermodal ITS. The NPP, developed through an interactive, consensus buildingprocess, presents the views, activities, and needs of the broad range of ITS stakeholders. Theaudience for the NPP includes the private and public sector leaders, transportation users andoperators, educators, transportation produce and service providers, and the general public.

2.0 THE IVHS STRATEGIC PLANS

Congress formally initiated the National IVHS Program in the United States with the passage .of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) of 1991. This act,

’described in Chapter 2, established the general goals for ITS in the United States. In ISTEA,Congress asked the United States Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT) to prepare astrategic plan to guide the development and implementation of ITS in the United States. Inturn, the U.S. DOT requested that the Intelligent Transportation Society of America (ITSAmerica), as a utilized federal advisory committee, prepare a strategic plan to serve as afoundation for the Congressional Report.

. The IVHS America Strategic Plan for Intelligent Vehicle-Highway Systems in the UnitedStates was published in May, 1992. This document, developed through a consensus-building process, established goals and objectives for a national ITS program. It identifiedkey challenges to ITS deployment and sought ways they could be resolved. The strategicplan also suggested appropriate roles for public, private, and academic participants, andoutlined a course of action to develop, test, and deploy ITS technology.

- The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) also developed an ITSPlan, which was submitted to Congress in June, 1992. This plan describes NHTSA’splans and programs to employ ITS to reduce traffic accidents, injuries and fatalities.

2


- The United States Department of Transportation Intelligent Vehicle-Highway SystemsStrategic Plan, based upon the NHTSA and ITS America strategic plans, was submitted toCongress in December, 1992. The U.S. DOT’s strategic plan also set forth the goals,milestones, and objectives of a national ITS program. It established a U.S. DOT programorganization and outlined the Department’s role in creating an environment that wasconducive to ITS development and deployment.

The National ITS Program Plan is the next step in this process. The NPP is a joint effortbetween the U.S. DOT and ITS America. It builds upon the visions of ITS described in thesestrategic plans to develop a single document incorporating the needs and perspectives of thebroader ITS community.

3.0 PURPOSE OF THE NATIONAL ITS PROGRAM PLAN

The NPP was specifically developed to:

. Describe the National ITS Program. The NPP outlines the research, development, testing,and other activities necessary to achieve and support deployment of a range of ITShighway and public transportation services within the framework of a nationallycompatible, intermodal system. The NPP describes federally-funded ITS programs, andidentifies, whenever possible, work performed by other governmental, academic, andprivate sector organizations that have impact on ITS development and deployment.

- Ensure that the intermodal aspects of ITS are considered. The concept of ITS is that of a“seamless” transportation system, allowing the safe and efficient movement of passengersand goods through a multimodal system. This edition of the NPP focuses on thetransportation of people and goods over a range of surface transportation modes. Whileair transportation, non-passenger rail, and shipping are beyond the scope of the currentNPP, it addresses the interface of public and private transportation with these modes.

l Guide investment decisions on program activities. ITS investment decisions are made bythe Federal, State and local governments, and the private sector based upon their variousgoals, objectives, and resources. While Congress has provided significant Federal supportfor the ITS program, the NPP facilitates consideration of strategic investment tradeoffs.These tradeoffs ensure sponsorship of a set of projects that best addresses varied publicinterests and responds to policy considerations. The NPP can assist State and localgovernments who are making transportation decisions by describing the services that areavailable to meet their operational needs. The NPP can also provide information aboutmarket readiness and aid private sector decisions about investments in productdevelopment. The NPP provides a focus for public/private/interest group dialogue, andfacilitates a coordinated, but still independent, decision-making process by government andprivate entities.

3


. Promote coordination. Success of the national ITS program relies on the cooperation andinteraction of many diverse participants in both the public and private sectors. The NPPpromotes compatibility and the coordination and integration of user service developmentactivities to avoid costly duplicative efforts.

. Maintain a focus on deployment. The NPP focuses ITS programs and activities onachieving transportation goals and objectives through the deployment of a nationallycompatible system. Two chapters of the NPP are exclusively devoted to the topics ofdeployment and deployment support. Another chapter, Program Assessment, focuses onmeasuring deployment progress.

. Assist in local policy decisions. The selection and deployment of many ITS user serviceswill be based on local needs and policy considerations. The NPP can, for example, assistlocal decision-makers in evaluating the applicability of various travel demand managementstrategies to local conditions.

. Facilitate national program assessment. The NPP will provide a means of assessingprogress against specific milestones, extent of deployment, and attainment of nationalprogram goals. It will also guide preparation of the U.S. DOT’s annual ImplementationReport to Congress required by ISTEA.

4.0 FEATURES OF THE NATIONAL ITS PROGRAM PLAN

The NPP is goal-oriented. The NPP is guided by the goals and objectives of the national ITSprogram, which were drawn from ISTEA, The Strategic Plan fur Intelligent Vehicle-HighwaySystems in the United States prepared by ITS America, and The ITS Strategic Plan Report toCongress prepared by the U.S. DOT.

The NPP is user-oriented. The NPP was developed around the concept of “user services”,e.g. the specific “services” and benefits that can be offered to users. The users of eachservice are clearly identified in the NPP and program activities are focused on meeting theirneeds. For example, individual travelers are the users of many of the services, but localtraffic and public transportation management agencies, commercial and public transportationfleet managers, and commercial vehicle drivers are also the “users” of other services. Thesetwenty-nine user services can be bundled in a variety of configurations for deployment to fituser needs and to achieve local or regional transportation goals and objectives.

The NPP promotes a shared vision of how ITS will be advanced in the United States. TheNPP is unique in that it integrates a range of activities that are public, private orpublic/private in nature. It also reflects consideration of the views of many different groups,including the federal government, state and local government agencies, and private sectorfirms, as well as those focusing on specific public interest areas such as the environment ortransportation safety.

4


The NPP seeks to establish consensus on descriptions of specific program activities andprojects that lead to accomplishment of specific program milestones. The development andon-going management of the NPP represent a major accomplishment in public/privatepartnerships. Although none of the activities identified in the NPP are binding on anygovernment agency or private organization, the NPP can serve as a valuable tool to all in theprocess of making decisions about investments of public and private funds.

The NPP is participative. The NPP has been prepared and will continue to be managed usinga participative process. This document is a joint effort by the federal government and ITSAmerica, and reflects the ideas and contributions of over two hundred different organizationsand individuals. In particular, ITS America, as a Federal advisory committee, will continue toplay a key role by participating in periodic program assessments and providing advice to theU.S. DOT on proposed updates and changes to the NPP. Participation by any interestedorganization or individual is solicited by U.S. DOT through Federal Register notices andpublic meetings.

5.0 ORGANIZATION OF THE NATIONAL ITS PROGRAM PLAN

The NPP is presented in two volumes. An Executive Summary and a Synopsis have alsobeen prepared. The Executive summary presents a very brief overview of the goals,objectives, and recommendations presented in the NPP. The Synopsis is a fifty pageencapsulation of the main topics discussed in Volume 1.

Volume I contains eight chapters that are summarized below.

Chapter I, National ITS Program Plan Overview, discusses the purpose, features, andorganization of the NPP.

Chapter II, Origins of the National ITS Program, discusses the social and legislativeenvironment that led to the formal creation of the ITS program. The chapter presents adiscussion of the need for ITS, the goals and objectives of the program, and how these goalsand objectives can be achieved through the deployment of ITS. It also defines the keyparticipants, elements of the national ITS program, and the annual planning process.

Chapter III, User Services, describes the concept of user services and the grouping of servicesinto “bundles”.

Chapter IV, National Compatibility, describes plans for achieving national compatibilitythrough the development of an open national ITS architecture, ITS standards, andtelecommunications systems.

Chapter V, User Services Integration, presents a conceptual framework for the inter-relationships among user services. User services are not likely to be developed independently.

5


Rather, they will be grouped or bundled according to the most likely development anddeployment scenarios. This chapter provides a framework for logically grouping individualuser services for development, testing and deployment.

Chapter VI, Deployment, presents a vision of ITS deployment and discusses optional roles forthe public and private sectors and how these roles impact deployment.

Chapter VII, Deployment Considerations, identifies the major issues that might presentchallenges or constraints to ITS deployment. Topics addressed are legal and institutionalissues, the need for new ways of doing business, outreach programs, funding, financialresponsibilities, societal implications, and market uncertainties. Particular attention is focusedon the barriers that affect deployment in the near-term.

Chapter VIII, Program Assessment, provides a framework for the assessment of the ITSprogram as well as the process for continuing to manage and update the NPP based on thisassessment.

Volume II, of the NPP contains the individual user service development plans. The plansdescribe the needs that led to the user service, a description of the service and how it mightoperate, the technologies that could be used, and the major milestones and activities needed toreach deployment of the service. The individual user service plans also discuss potential costsand benefits, and the role of the public and private sector in the development and deploymentof the service.

I NATIONAL ITS PROGRAM PLAN CHAPTER II - ORIGINS OF THE NATIONAL ITS PROGRAM

CHAPTER II - ORIGINS OF THE NATIONAL ITS PROGRAM

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The current emphasis of the ITS program is on forming a base from which to build ITS. Thischapter presents some of the underlying issues that led to the development of the ITS programand it explores the societal, economic, and legislative influences that have shaped the ITSgoals. These goals form the foundation for the ITS program. The chapter also presents anoverview of the national ITS program, the key participants and their roles in the program, andthe annual process for updating the National ITS Program Plan (NPP).

2.0 WHY DO WE NEED TO CHANGE?

The nature of surface transportation is being shaped by a number of challenges, constraints,and opportunities. There is no single answer to the complex transportation problems thatconfront many communities. There is no doubt that traditional approaches to providingmobility and improving safety will continue to be important, however, alternative ways ofmaking existing roadways and vehicles safer and more efficient must be found. Rapidadvances in ITS technologies will allow the development of new approaches to the solution oftransportation problems, and to make traditional solutions more effective and efficient.

The following sections discuss the societal, economic, and legislative factors that haveinfluenced, and will continue to influence the development and deployment of ITS.

2.1 Accessibility and Mobility

The basic challenge for transportation decision makers is to provide mobility and accessibilityfor all. Mobility, simply defined, is the ability to travel from one point to another. Growingcongestion in the United States threatens the mobility necessary to the economic and socialhealth of the nation. The concept of accessibility includes both the ability to safely andconveniently use the available transportation systems, and the recognition that access to goodsand services may be met without physical travel. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)makes access to public transportation for disabled individuals a national goal. In addition, thepopulation in the United States is aging as the baby-boom generation matures. Access tosafe, convenient, cost effective transportation is essential for the economic and social health ofthe nation, since lack of adequate transportation limits access to employment, education,medical care, and social and other essential services.

2.2 Dependence on the Single Occupant Vehicle

The single occupant vehicle (SOV) remains the primary means of transportation in the UnitedStates. According to the August 1993 joint U.S. DOT and Environmental Protection Agency(EPA) report, Clean Air through Transportation: Challenges in Meeting National Air Quality

7

I - NATIONAL ITS PROGRAM PLAN CHAPTER II - ORIGINS OF THE NATIONAL ITS PROGRAM

Standards, of 250 million daily passenger trips, 94 percent are made in automobiles or trucksand only 2 percent by public transportation. Automobile travel, as measured by vehicle milestraveled, has increased markedly, far outpacing population growth and the construction of newroadway facilities. More vehicles and increasing personal travel have contributed to thesevere traffic congestion that has become familiar in many urban and suburban areas in theUnited States.

The addition of sufficient roadway capacity to meet current and projected demand for SOVtravel is simply not possible in some areas. Therefore, the increasing demand for travel mustbe met by a more balanced transportation system. While private, single occupant travel willremain an important part of the transportation system in this country, maintaining mobilityand environmental quality will require a greater use of higher occupancy modes oftransportation.

Despite increasing congestion and delay, the public has been slow to shift from SOV toalternative modes of travel Travel by higher occupancy vehicles must be made moreattractive and convenient, particularly for the daily commuter traveling to work.

2.3 Land Use and Demographics

Land use patterns determine, to a large extent, how transportation needs can be met.Demographic patterns further help to define the transportation needs of the population. Longterm shifts from urban to suburban living have made suburb-to-suburb travel the dominantcommuting pattern in the United States. Low density development makes the provision ofefficient, convenient public transit service prohibitively expensive. However, to maintainmobility in suburban (as well as urban) areas, the average occupancy of vehicles must beincreased.

2.4 Economics and Pmductivity

There is a strong link between transportation investment and economic productivity. A majorrestructuring of American industry is underway. There is a shift from heavy industry thatrequired proximity to natural resources, to lighter manufacturing and service industries thatneed quick, reliable access to markets to maintain their competitiveness. The cost ofcongestion in the United States is estimated in excess of $100 billion a year. TheTransportation Research Board (TRB) Special Report 242, Curbing Gridlock, reports that thecost of delay in U.S. urban areas, based on estimates of motorists’ value of time and wastedfuel alone, has reached $43 billion a year.

2.5 International Competitiveness

Surface transportation policy must also address issues associated with global competitiveness.A major goal of ISTEA is to develop intermodal, national transportation systems that integrate

8


road networks with ports and other facilities. This will effectively produce a “seamless”transportation system which facilitates the intermodal movement of freight across national andinternational boundaries.

2.6 Changes in Defense Industry

Because of reductions in military spending, defense companies are investigating commercialor civilian applications for their technologies. As noted in the U.S. DOT Report/VolpeNational Transportation Systems Center report, Institutional Barriers to ZVHS: DefenseCompany Interviews and Case Studies, “the transportation arena has figured prominently inthe search for new markets because of the natural technological fit between existing defensecapabilities and the advanced technologies that are being integrated into the nation’stransportation infrastructure system.” The emerging ITS field is an example of one of themarkets with a match between defense industry capabilities and advanced technologyrequirements..

2.7 The National Information Infrastructure

The telecommunications industry is also undergoing rapid change. The InformationSuperhighway, officially known as the National Information Infrastructure (NII), will useemerging digital technology to revolutionize the delivery of communications, education, andentertainment services, among others. The N I I will be privately built, owned, and operated,The NII holds potential as a means to convey real time information on various transportationsystems and to provide accessibility to services without the need to travel. This potential canbe seen now through the increasing use of telecommuting and a range of services, such asairline reservations and shopping, from various information providers using the personalcomputer platform.

2.8 Fiscal Pressures

Increasing fiscal pressures challenge public officials to carefully examine how public fundsare spent. Scarce funds must be used in the most effective way to provide the public withadequate levels of services. State and local governments must focus attention and resourceson many other pressing priorities in addition to transportation, including crime, education,health care, homelessness, unemployment and poverty. Large investments in transportationinfrastructure may no longer be the optimal choice for transportation spending when a lesscostly alternative will suffice.

2.9 The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA)

ISTEA was structured to address a number of the societal challenges involved in providingaccessible transportation. The purpose of the ISTEA was to provide a new vision of surfacetransportation in America. It included the goals of:

9


. enhancing the capacity, efficiency, and safety of the highway system, includingalternatives to additional physical capacity;

. enhancing efforts to attain air quality goals established by the Clean Air Act;

. reducing societal, economic, and environmental costs associated with traffic congestion;

. developing and promoting an ITS industry in the United States, particularly creating anAmerican presence in this emerging field of technology; and

. developing a technology base for ITS systems.

The ISTEA has led the U.S. DOT to begin developing the framework for defining andestablishing the National Transportation System (NTS). The NTS will encompass all modesof transportation, including new technological innovations. Incorporated into the NTS will bethe 155,000 mile National Highway System (NHS). NTS goals include, but are not limitedto:

. identifying local, regional, and national bottlenecks, missing linkages and new requiredcomponents in the Nation’s existing infrastructure across all modes;

. implementing ISTEA’s mandates to integrate all modes into the metropolitan and statewidetransportation planning processes -- cost-benefit analyses for capital projects andmanagement systems that address operations, congestion relief and intermodal systemrequirements must take into account the full transportation picture; and

. encouraging transportation decision makers at all levels to favor investments that furtherthe interdependence of local, regional, and national networks, thus leveraging the benefitsof all.

2.10 The Clean Air Act Amendments

The Clean Air Act (CAA) Amendments, coupled with the ISTEA have led Federal, State, andlocal governments to more clearly align transportation and air quality goals. The ISTEArequires the development of a national transportation system which is “environmentally-sound.” The Intelligent Vehicle Highway Systems (IVHS) Act within ISTEA specificallyrequires promotion of those systems that enhance States’ efforts to attain air quality goalsestablished pursuant to the CAA.

The 1990 CAA Amendments set strict deadlines for “nonattainment” areas to meet nationalambient air quality standards depending on the severity of their air pollution problems.Section 176(c) of the CAA makes it the affirmative responsibility of the Federal agencysupporting an action to ensure that its activities conform to an approved or promulgated airquality implementation plan. It also prohibits metropolitan planning organizations (MPO)from approving any transportation plan, program, or project which does not conform to such aplan. A conforming plan or program must not cause, create, or worsen violations. It mustnot obstruct attainment and must demonstrate timely implementation of transportation controlmeasures.

10


Both the ISTEA and the CAA Amendments compel Federal, State, and local governments todevelop new strategies and mechanisms to address national transportation needs. This leadsto considerable pressure to develop additional tools, besides traditional transportation controlmeasures, to combat the damage caused to the environment by vehicle use.

3.0 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

The National ITS program is structured to respond to the forces discussed in the previoussection. The national ITS program goals and objectives have evolved as the program hasdeveloped. The goals are to:

- Improve the safety of the Nation’s surface transportation system;- Increase the operational efficiency and capacity of the surface transportation system;- Reduce energy and environmental costs associated with traffic congestion;. Enhance present and future productivity;- Enhance the personal mobility and the convenience and comfort of the surface

transportation system; and- Create an environment in which the development and deployment of ITS can flourish.

The program goals set out in ISTEA provided the basic framework, and were expanded inboth ITS America’s Strategic Plan for Intelligent Vehicle-Highway Systems and the U.S.DOT’s IVHS Strategic Plan.

3.1 Improve the Safety of the Nation’s Surface Transportation System

Reducing the number and severity of fatalities and injuries on the roadway system is animportant objective of the national ITS program. ITS can positively impact safety byreducing the number of collisions and by reducing the severity of collisions when they occur.

Fewer collisions reduces the injuries and fatalities that may have resulted if the collisions hadoccurred. ITS can have a direct impact on the number of collisions that occur by providingsystems that:

- assist the driver in avoiding collisions;- monitor and advise the driver (or others) on the condition and safety readiness of the

vehicle, driver, and driving environment; and. enhance driver and vehicle performance and driver response to hazardous situations.

The automated highway system will ultimately create an automated highway system that isextremely safe.

Reducing the severity of collisions reduces the seriousness of the injuries and the number offatalities. The severity of injuries received can be lessened by reducing amount of force

11


occupants absorb during a crash and by providing prompt medical treatment to victims. Inthe event that a collision is unavoidable, collision avoidance systems may reduce impactspeeds and thereby reduce the severity of injuries. Occupant restraint systems that deploy inthe instant before a crash can provide additional protection to occupants during the crash.Incident management, hazardous materials incident response, and emergency medical servicescan reduce the time required to detect and respond appropriately to a crash. Prompt,appropriate medical treatment is effective in reducing the severity of injuries sustained and thenumber of fatalities.

Many ITS systems will be largely invisible to the traveler, others may produce profoundchanges in the traveler’s environment. However, all ITS systems must be developed anddeployed in a manner that does not negatively impact safety.

3.2 Increase the Operational Efficiency and Capacity of the Surface Transportation System

Capacity enhancements increase the absolute number of vehicles that can pass through someportion of the system under “ideal” conditions. Operational efficiency enhancements improvethe flow of passengers, goods, and/or vehicles through the system without increasing capacity.

Traditional measures of mitigating congestion depend heavily upon the provision of newphysical capacity, such as the construction of new facilities or the expansion of existingfacilities. The social, environmental, and economic costs of traditional approaches arebecoming prohibitive. Frequently, acquisition of new roadway right-of-way adversely impactsand disrupts businesses and neighborhoods, and has detrimental impacts on sensitive areasincluding wetlands, parklands, and historic and cultural sites. The congestion relief realizedthrough the addition of new physical capacity may be disappointingly short-lived as theaddition of new travelers to the system, often quickly negates the improvements. Activitiesthat increase operational efficiency promise to represent desirable alternatives.

ITS can directly impact the operational efficiency of the transportation system by reducingdisruptions due to incidents and improving the level of service and convenience provided totravelers. The impact of incidents can be reduced by systems that enhance the trafficoperator’s and emergency services’ ability to detect, respond to, and resolve incidents, andprovide travelers with the information necessary to avoid affected areas.

In addition to providing improvements in safety, the automated highway system (AHS) iscapable of increasing roadway capacity. AHS will allow vehicles to travel at short headways(spacings between vehicles), at high speeds, thereby increasing the absolute number ofvehicles that can pass through a section of roadway over a given period of time.

Some ITS technologies will allow transportation policy makers and planners to implement awide range of Transportation Demand Management (TDM) services. TDM techniques, someof which are controversial, influence a traveler’s choice of travel mode, travel time, and other

12


travel behavior. TDM services encourage more efficient and effective use of availabletransportation capacity and reduce demand, rather than increasing system capacity. Forexample, a number of TDM techniques are targeted at making public transit an attractivealternative to SOV trips.

3.3 Reduce Energy and Environmental Costs Associated with Traffic Congestion

Congestion occurs when travel demand exceeds the operating capacity of the system. Undercongested travel conditions, vehicles produce higher levels of air pollutants and noise, andconsume more fuel for each vehicle and passenger mile traveled. The direct and indirectenvironmental impacts of ITS applications focused on reducing congestion are highlydependent upon the combination of technologies that are deployed. The systems deployedshould be examined for their net contribution towards achieving environmental and energygoals.

In the short run, ITS user services should have a net positive effect on energy efficiency. Anumber of systems can be employed to reduce inefficient SOV travel by improving theconvenience and attractiveness of carpooling and public transit, and the development ofalternatives to travel. It is also apparent that alleviating congestion can reduce harmfulemissions, particularly hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide (CO).

ITS, such as traveler information systems, could reduce overall congestion and delay byproviding drivers with information on traffic conditions and public transit availability. Thisinformation would allow drivers to select less congested, alternate routes, or to select analternate mode of travel. Diverting automobile travelers to less congested routes makes moreefficient use of under-utilized infrastructure. From an energy standpoint, this appearspreferable to vehicles inching along in stop-start traffic. However, the diversion of traffic fromcongested to uncongested routes could produce complaints of increased noise from personsresiding along the “new” routes. This could necessitate the use of other traffic managementand control techniques at the local level to alleviate such conditions. Route diversions mayalso result in an increase in the length of individual trips and an overall increase in vehiclemiles traveled (VMT), offsetting some the benefits obtained by routing drivers away fromcongested facilities. Each situation will be unique, and will be influenced by the availabilityof suitable travel alternatives.

ITS can also be an important tool to develop effective strategies in accordance with therequirements of the CAA. This act requires State and local governments to implementstrategies to attain reductions in emissions of ozone precursors, CO, and particulate matter.ITS can facilitate the development of measures, such as congestion pricing, which can behighly cost-effective in contributing to this effort. Moreover, would-be travelers can use ITSservices to access information regarding control measures being employed, pricing schedules,availability of parking spaces at nearby park and ride lots, and convenience of othertransportation options, such as bus arrival and departure times, vanpool availability, and car

13


pool matching. The availability of such information could lessen reliance on SOV travel, andencourage use of alternative forms of transportation. Research is required to uncover moredefinitive findings on this issue.

The energy use impacts of ITS over the longer run are uncertain. It can be argued that, bymaking travel by automobile “easier,” some ITS services could induce growth in privateautomobile travel. There is much debate and uncertainty about the probability and magnitudeof such “induced” travel demand. Long-term projections in this area are complicated by thefact that there are other variables involved, such as demographic shifts, economic cycles andtechnological advances in related fields.

3.4 Enhance Present and Future Productivity

An objective of the national ITS program is to reduce transportation costs for all users of thesurface transportation system, including businesses, operating agencies, fleet managers, andindividuals.

Productivity can be improved by reducing the costs incurred by fleet operators and others, byreducing travel time, and by improving transportation systems planning and management. ITScan improve productivity by making better use of existing facilities, reducing travel times(improving mobility), and decreasing the need for additional facilities. The ITS programincludes services that will improve public transportation customer service by providing betterpublic transit information, schedule adherence, and responsiveness. Finally, the program aimsto improve the quality and cost efficiency associated with the collection and use of datanecessary for transportation planning, operations management, roadway construction andmaintenance services, and user fees.

To reduce operating and manufacturing costs, businesses and manufacturers are reducingproduct cycles times (the time it takes to move a product from the factory to the selling floor)and emphasizing the use of “just-in-time” delivery systems to reduce inventory costs. Thesechanges are resulting in more frequent and smaller size shipments. From 1980 to 1989,American business reduced inventories from 26 percent (final sales) to 20 percent and saved$14 billion. By 1995, 55 percent of the nation’s manufacturers are expected to be using just-in-time delivery. These factors reinforce the need for investing in a surface transportationsystem that can provide flexibility required by new business structures.

3.5 Enhance the Personal Mobility and the Convenience and Comfort of the SurfaceTransportation System

Traveler mobility and accessibility can be enhanced through ITS applications. With real-timeaccess to pre-trip and en-route information about routes, fares, and connections on bus andrail, and on automobile routes and traffic conditions, would-be travelers would likely findeach mode easier to use. Ridesharing services and transit will have personalizing capabilities,

14


such that affordable door-to-door service can be readily arranged even in areas with lowerpopulation densities. Other services are built around improving the security of travel on bothpublic and private vehicles. Such secure, convenient, affordable door-to-door services havespecial appeal to elderly, handicapped, young, rural and inner city residents who are nowreluctant or unable to use established transportation systems. Travelers using these serviceswill have greater confidence about using new and various routes and modes. They willbenefit from greater predictability about their travel times and experience a reduction in thestresses involved in their travel.

3.6 Create an Environment in Which the Development and Deployment of ITS Can Flourish

A specific objective of the ITS program is to support the establishment of a significant U.S.-based industry for hardware, software, and services that can achieve substantial domesticmarket penetration and a strong international presence.

ITS will offer many opportunities for facilitating the development of new commercialproducts and services, and represents a potential global market for technologies and services.The United States is just one of a number of countries making considerable investments intransportation technologies and services. Established ITS programs are on-going in Europeand Japan, and interest and involvement in ITS is growing in Australia and elsewhere. Whileearly efforts in Europe and Japan have given them the lead in the development of ITStechnologies, the situation is changing. An ITS report titled, A Comparison of Progress in theUnited States and Japan through 1993, makes it evident that the United States is emerging as .a leader in a number of areas. An important factor is the United States’ continued investmentin a unified NPP, an ITS architecture developed through consensus, and a commitment toresolving key institutional and legal issues. The approaches taken by both Europe and Japanleave unresolved such key questions as how a broad array of services will be integrated undera system concept and coordinated across international boundaries. These U.S. efforts couldpotentially facilitate the creation of markets and the deployment of ITS earlier than in Europeand Japan.

In order to reach full deployment, the national ITS program also includes the objective ofdiversifying and redirecting the transportation profession. This can be done through neweducation and training programs and by providing opportunities for individuals andorganizations with diverse skill mixes to participate in ITS programs. ITS deployment goalscan also be reached by drawing on our current domestic sources of technology and technicalskill, most notably the defense industries, national laboratories, and other federally-fundedresources.

The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) has significant transportationramifications. A goal of NAFTA is to eliminate trade and investment barriers among Canada,Mexico and the United States. Because over 85 percent of the U.S. trade with Canada andMexico moves by land transportation, NAFTA creates opportunities in land transportation by

15


ensuring that U.S. companies can provide cross-border truck and bus services into thesecountries. It will also liberalize investment in land transportation services in Mexico,including intermodal terminals and landside port activities over a ten-year period. ITStechnologies (for example, transponders, smart cards, global positioning systems, onboardcomputers, etc.) will be important tools in expediting the cross-border transfer of commercialdrivers, trucks/buses, and cargo/passengers through international electronic clearanceinitiatives.

4.0 THE NATIONAL ITS PROGRAM

The national ITS program is organized around five general areas that collectively aim atimproving all facets of highway and public transportation. They include:

. Research and Development

. Operational Tests

. National ITS Architecture

. Standards and Guidelines

. Supporting ITS Deployment

4.1 Research and Development

Research and development (R&D) activities provide the basic tools and knowledge basesrequired to achieve deployment of ITS services and systems. R&D is needed on specific

.technology components and on integrated systems that provide one or more ITS user services.R&D is also required on the safety and human factors aspects of ITS and the societal andinstitutional issues that must be addressed for the successful deployment of ITS. The resultsof R&D activities provide information to modify services or to proceed with operational tests.

4.2 Operational Tests

Operational tests bridge the gap between R&D activities and full-scale deployment of proventechnologies. Whereas the R&D phase of the ITS program emphasizes both technologies andservices, the emphasis in operational tests is on integrated systems and services. Operationaltests are being implemented as partnerships among the public and private sectors andacademia, with all partners sharing in the technical, financial, and administrativeresponsibilities.

Results of the operational test program will be key factors in evaluating potential ITSapplications. Many combinations of technologies, architectures, transportation modes, andscenarios, such as urban and rural, should be evaluated in the real-world settings ofoperational tests. The primary emphasis of most field tests is on effectiveness and userassessments. Cost estimates and requirements are refined, and institutional and deploymentissues are identified. Consistent evaluation techniques and parameters are essential in

16


comparing the results of different operational tests on a national level. If the use of federalfunds by states is authorized to support future deployment, operational test results will feeddirectly into the development of guidelines and standards which will determine eligibility forFederal-aid funding.

The U.S. DOT has established a program of open solicitations through the Federal Register toannounce opportunities to participate in the operational test program. Appendix B provides asample list of on-going operational tests. In addition, four areas have been identified as“priority corridors” for ITS activities using specific criteria provided in the ISTEA. Theseareas are: a Northeast Corridor centered along I-95 from Maryland to Connecticut; a MidwestCorridor including the Chicago metropolitan area and stretching from Gary, Indiana toMilwaukee, Wisconsin; the Houston, Texas metropolitan area; and a Southern CaliforniaCorridor along I-5 from Los Angeles to San Diego. Operational tests will be negotiated eachyear within these corridors based on the plans of the region and needed activities as identifiedin the NPP.

4.3 National ITS Architecture

A national ITS architecture will serve as the broad framework for ITS deployment over thenext twenty years. It will facilitate compatibility of ITS systems across the country,contributing to the successful development and deployment of ITS. The ITS architecture willdefine interfaces and how information flows among and between vehicles, roadsideinfrastructure, and transportation management centers to accommodate ITS. It willaccommodate different levels of implementation and a wide range of system designs. Itsflexibility will allow the ITS to evolve over time and will allow different goals to besupported across many regions.

The U.S. DOT initiated the National ITS Architecture Development Program in September1993. Four teams led by Hughes Aircraft, Loral, Rockwell International, and WestinghouseElectric were selected to independently develop alternative ITS architectures. Eacharchitecture is based on a twenty year planning horizon (1993-2012) and addresses the currentset of user services. During the development of the architecture, such issues as “openness,”standards, compatibility, and incremental deployment are being considered. The architecturetask is being managed carefully to ensure that architectural, rather than design, issues areaddressed. The development process includes a broad consensus-building effort to ensure thateveryone who will be affected by the architecture will have an opportunity to provide input.A national architecture will be selected by the U.S. DOT in 1996 based on the results ofanalytical and real-world tests, performance, policy issues, and the consensus process.

4.4 Standards and Guidelines

Appropriate standards enhance the marketplace for both producers and consumers. Standardsmake it possible to have interchangeable system components. Interchangeable components

17


eliminate unnecessary product development costs caused by differences in the way productsinterconnect, and foster area-wide deployment, increasing the utility of ITS to the user.Although the specifics will vary from one system to another, performance, interoperability,and other standards or guidelines may need to be developed.

The national ITS architecture will influence the development of safety, communication,vehicle and infrastructure standards. While standard-setting activities will certainly occur inparallel with the architecture development, some standards cannot be finalized until thenational ITS architecture has been established. A number of recognized standards-makingbodies are active in areas that impact ITS. They include, among others, the American Societyfor Testing and Materials (ASTM), the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers(IEEE), the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE), Electronic Industries Association (EIA),Institute of Navigation (ION), Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), National ElectricalManufacturers Association (NEMA), and the Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA).

4.5 Supporting ITS Deployment

While many ITS user services will be developed and deployed by the private sector, thepublic sector has a role in supporting and facilitating deployment. The U.S. DOT hasestablished a program to address non-technical constraints to deployment, includingpublic/private partnerships, intergovernmental cooperation and coordination, legal andregulatory constraints, intellectual property, environmental and other socioeconomicconsiderations. These issues are often cross-cutting, affecting many user services. Otheractivities currently underway are aimed at increasing public awareness and understandingITS user services, including an assessment of user acceptance and willingness to pay forvarious services.

of .

The U.S. DOT’s Early ITS Deployment Planning Program was established to educate stateand local government officials on the critical issues related to deploying ITS. Throughout thelife of the ISTEA, the U.S. DOT intends to offer deployment planning support to the 75largest U.S. metropolitan areas and 30 of the major intercity corridors linking metropolitanareas. These planning studies will highlight the needs of the specific area and address thestrategies to best accomplish those needs over both the short and long term.

5.0 KEY PARTICIPANTS

Implementing a nationally compatible system of ITS technologies and services in the UnitedStates will require unprecedented levels of coordination and cooperation. This effort willinvolve hundreds of entities and thousands of individuals representing the private sector,professional societies, public interest groups, the academic community, federal, state, andlocal governments, ITS America, and private citizens.

18


The U.S. DOT will serve as a facilitator and a leader in the early stages of the developmentof ITS. It will provide the national emphasis and perspective on safety, congestion relief,mobility enhancement, environmental impact, energy conservation, productivity improvements,and system standards necessary to assure the development and deployment of a nationallycompatible ITS. It will fund high-risk research, be a major participant in operational tests,and play a key role in ITS cost and benefit evaluation, Within the U.S. DOT, the keyparticipants include the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the Federal TransitAdministration (FTA), the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), theResearch and Special Programs Administration (RSPA), and the Office of the Secretary ofTransportation (OST).

Other Federal agencies with important roles in various aspects of the ITS Program include theDepartment of Commerce (DOC), the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), theDepartment of Energy (DOE), the Department of Justice (DOJ), the Environmental ProtectionAgency (EPA), the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC), the Advanced Research ProjectsAgency (ARPA), and the National Laboratories.

The Intelligent Transportation Society of America (ITS America) is chartered as a utilizedFederal Advisory Committee to advise the U.S. DOT on the ITS program. ITS America hasestablished a clearinghouse for data related to ITS research and development. Throughworkshops, conferences, and the committee structure, ITS America brings together the ITScommunity and provides a forum for the discussion of the challenges and opportunitiespresented by ITS. The mission of ITS America is to stimulate interest and activity in ITS andto coordinate and foster public/private/academic partnerships supporting the deployment of .ITS.

The private sector has the principal responsibility for developing the technology andmarketing the products and services that will bring ITS to fruition. It may also have anincreasing role in providing and operating certain infrastructure elements on an entrepreneurialbasis, and may play a key role in conducting operational tests. The private sector alsoincludes fleet operators who will deploy ITS to improve their operations efficiencies. Theprivate sector participants represent an extremely diverse group, each with a different set ofgoals, objectives, needs, constraints and opportunities.

State and local governments and transportation authorities currently own, operate, andmaintain most roadway and public transit systems. These agencies will play a primary role inselecting, purchasing, installing, operating, and maintaining ITS components which interactwith these systems.

Metropolitan Planning Organizations’ (MPO) responsibilities and authorities have expanded asa result of ISTEA. MPOs are responsible for deploying ITS infrastructure based on localneeds, priorities, and decisions, particularly in the areas of congestion management and air

19

I - NATIONAL ITS PROGRAM PLAN CHAPTER II - ORIGINS OF TIE NATIONAL ITS PROGRAM

quality standards attainment. These broad new assignments place MPOs, working togetherwith state and local governments, in a strategic position to advance ITS.

Professional societies will identify research needs, conduct research and policy studies,establish standards and protocols in their areas of responsibility, and collect and disseminateinformation to their constituents.

Academia plays an important role in the development of educational programs and as apartner in basic and applied research, development, technology assessment, technologytransfer, and operational tests.

Public interest groups will help to ensure that appropriately balanced ITS alternatives areconsidered, that costs and benefits are properly weighed, and that a focus is maintained onmeeting ITS goals and objectives and the needs of the greater community.

Private citizens will provide continuing feedback on the value of ITS services in a number ofways. Their comments and participation in ITS planning activities are invaluable in plottingprogram direction and measuring its progress. Private citizens will be the users and purchasersof many ITS products and will ultimately determine the success or failure of those products inthe marketplace.

The roles of the key participants will evolve as ITS is developed and deployed. As pointedout before, ITS involves a significant paradigm shift in the planning, development, funding,operations, and maintenance of transportation systems. Public/private, private/private, andpublic/public partnerships will play a large role in both the development and deployment ofITS.

6.0 THE PROGRAM PLANNING PROCESS

The NPP is not a static document, but a step in an on-going process. The NPP will beupdated regularly to reflect changes in program direction and priority. NPP updates will be inthe form of a companion document that provides updated information on specific areas of theNPP. Every few years, a completely new edition of the NPP will be developed. The updatewill be a joint effort between the U.S. DOT and ITS America.

This update process will be conducted in parallel with the formal process ITS America willuse to provide formal advice to the U.S DOT as well the development of the U.S. DOT reportto Congress. All three of these activities are largely dependent on an assessment of the statusof the ITS Program. That assessment process is described in Chapter VIII of this NPP.

ITS America will provide formal program advice to the U.S. DOT in the form of a ProgramAdvice Memorandum (PAM). It will present ITS America’s counsel on program adjustmentsor other modifications for the two federal fiscal years following its submission.

20


The annual report to Congress is in response to a requirement specified in Section 6054 of theIVHS Act in ISTEA that U.S. DOT will provide an annual implementation report to Congresson the status of the ITS program. This report shall provide annual updates on programprogress, including realized and possible benefits, cost-sharing arrangements, non-technicalconstraints, and recommendations for national action.

The schedule for NPP updates will be integrated with the schedules for these two relatedactivities as well as the Congressional budget cycle and ITS America’s Board of Directors andCoordinating Council meetings. Table 2-l presents the sequence of activities for the NPPupdate, the PAM development process, and the development of the Implementation Report toCongress.

Table 2-1 Program Planning Process

. New edition or update of the NPP is distributed.

. Presentation of U.S. DOT’s program issues to ITS America. Public comments on the U.S.DOT program issues are solicited through the Federal Register.

. ITS America technical committees discuss and deliberate U.S. DOT’s federal program issues,develop input for the ITS program assessment workshop, and suggest changes to the NPP.

. The ITS America Benefits, Evaluations and Costs (BEC) Committee hosts an ITS programassessment workshop. All of the technical committees participate. Results documented in areport. A Joint Writing Team begins to update the NPP.

. The ITS America Planning Committee drafts a Program Assessment Memorandum (PAM)based on the program assessment workshop report, committee input, and consideration of theU.S. DOT’s program issues. ITS America and U.S. DOT complete the draft update to the NPP.

. Public comments on the update to the NPP are solicited.

. ITS America and U.S. DOT approve the update. The ITS America Coordinating Council andBoard of Directors approve the PAM to the U.S. DOT.

. ITS America transmits the PAM to U.S. DOT.

. The first update to the NPP is released. The U.S. DOT submits its annual ImplementationReport to Congress as required by the ISTEA.

21

NATIONAL ITS PROGRAM PLAN CHAPTER III - USER SERVICES

CHAPTER III - USER SERVICES

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The national ITS program is focused on the development and deployment of a collection ofinter-related user services. Twenty-nine user services have been defined to date as part of thenational program planning process. This list of user services is neither exhaustive nor final.There are a wide array of transportation services that could develop that are not included inthis list. In addition, the services here are expected to change over time. Some will developlargely as envisioned. New services will emerge, and others, for various reasons, will neverbe developed. This list of services, and the accompanying descriptions are expected to evolvethrough program plan updates and new editions.

The users of these service include travelers using all modes of transportation, transportationmanagement center operators, transit operators, Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs),commercial vehicle owners and operators, state and local governments, and many others whowill benefit from deployment of ITS. Detailed plans for each user service are provided inVolume II of the NPP.

2.0 USER SERVICE DESCRIPTIONS

Although each user service is unique, they share common characteristics and features asdescribed below.

l Individual user services are building blocks that may be combined for deployment in avariety of fashions. The combination of services deployed will vary depending upon localpriorities, needs, and market forces. Within the National ITS Program Plan (NPP), userservices have been grouped into “bundles” based on likely deployment scenarios asdescribed later in this chapter and in Chapter V, User Services Integration.

- User services are comprised of multiple technological elements or functions which may becommon with other services. For example, a single user service will usually requireseveral technologies, such as advanced communications, mapping, and surveillance, whichmay be shared with other user services. This commonality of technological functions isone basis for the suggested bundling of services.

- User services are in various stages of development and will be deployed as systemsaccording to different schedules. Some of the technologies required by various userservices are currently available in the market place, while others will require significantresearch and development before they can be deployed. The development and deploymentof an individual service will be guided by the policies and priorities established by both

22


the public and private sector participants. These policies and priorities will evolve basedon changing technologies, economic factors, and market conditions.

- Costs and benefits of user services depend upon deployment scenarios. Once the basictechnological functions, such as communications or surveillance, have been deployed forone user service, the additional functions needed by one or more related services mayrequire only a small incremental cost to produce additional, often significant, benefits.

. Many user services can be deployed in rural, suburban and/or urban settings. Userservices are not specific to a particular location. Rather, the function of the service can beadapted to meet local needs and conditions.

3.0 USER SERVICE BUNDLING

Although it may be possible to deploy a system that provides a single user service, in manycases, services are more likely to be deployed in combination with other services or “bundle”which share some commonality.

For purposes of discussion in the NPP, the twenty-nine user services have been sorted intocategories termed “bundles.” The services within these bundles, as shown in Table 3-1, maybe related in a number of different ways. In some cases, the institutional perspectives oforganizations that will deploy the services provided the rationale for the formation of aspecific bundle. Other bundles were organized around common technical functionalities.These services could have been bundled in any number of ways. Table 3-l presents only one .of a number of possibilities. When the services are actually deployed, it is likely thatservices will also be mixed and matched among the bundles, as well as within a singlebundle. The technical inter-relationships among the user services, and the functionalities theymay share are discussed in greater detail in Chapter V, User Services Integration.

3.1 Travel and Transportation Management

The Travel and Transportation Management user services were grouped in a single bundlebecause of the information they share about the surface transportation system. These servicescollect and process information about the surface transportation system, and providecommands to various traffic control devices. Travel management services disseminate thisinformation to the traveler. When used in concert, these services can provide a comprehensivetravel and transportation management system. These services also provide information tosupport the Travel Demand Management and the Public Transportation Operations bundles.Thus, the Travel and Transportation Management bundle will be of interest to transportationpolicy makers, public and private sector operators of transportation management centers, thoseinvolved in incident response or travel demand management, and private sector vendorssupplying travel information products and services.

23


Table 3-1 User Service Bundles

Bundle

1. Travel and TransportationManagement

User Services

1. En-Route Driver Information2. Route Guidance3. Traveler Services Information4. Traffic Control5. Incident Management6. Emissions Testing and Mitigation

2. Travel Demand Management 1. Demand Management and Operations2. Pre-Trip Travel Information3. Ride Matching and Reservation

3. Public Transportation Operations 1. Public Transportation Management2. En-Route Transit Information3. Personalizd Public Transit4. Public Travel Security

4. Electronic Payment

5. Commercial Vehicle Operations

1. Electronic Payment Services

1. Commercial Vehicle Electronic Clearance2. Automated Roadside Safety Inspection3. On-board Safety Monitoring4. Commercial Vehicle Administrative Processes5. Hazardous Materials Incident Response6. Freight Mobility

6. Emergency Management 1. Emergency Notification and Personal Security2. Emergency Vehicle Management

7. Advanced Vehicle Control andSafety Systems

1. Longitudinal Collision Avoidance2. Lateral Collision Avoidance3. Intersection Collision Avoidance4. Vision Enhancement for Crash Avoidance5. Safety Readiness6. Pm-Crash Restraint Deployment7. Automated Highway System

24


. En-Route Driver Information

Provides driver advisories and in-vehicle signing for convenience and safety.

Driver advisories are similar to pre-trip planning information, but they are provided oncetravel begins. Driver advisories convey real-time information about traffic conditions,incidents, construction, transit schedules, and weather conditions to drivers of personal,commercial and public transit vehicles. This information allows a driver to either selectthe best route, or shift to another mode in mid-trip if desired.

In-vehicle signing, the second component of en-route driver information, provides thesame types of information found on physical road signs today, directly in the vehicle. Theservice could be extended to include warnings of road conditions and safe speeds forspecific types of vehicles, such as autos, buses, and large trucks, but potential usersinclude drivers of all types of vehicles. This service might be especially useful to elderlydrivers, in rural areas with large numbers of tourists, or in areas with unusual or hazardousroadway conditions.

. Route Guidance

Provides travelers with simple instructions on how to best reach their destinations.

The route guidance service provides a suggested route to reach a specified destination.Early route guidance systems are based on static information about the roadway network . .or transit schedules, When fully deployed, route guidance systems will provide travelerswith directions to their destinations based on real-time information about the transportationsystem. The route guidance service will consider traffic conditions, status and schedule oftransit systems, and road closures in developing the best route. Directions will generallyconsist of simple instructions on turns or other upcoming maneuvers. Users of the serviceinclude not only drivers of all types of vehicles, but also non-vehicular travelers, such aspedestrians or bicyclists, who could get specialized route guidance from a hand-helddevice.

. Traveler Services Information

Provides a business directory, or “‘yellow pages,” of service information.

Traveler services information provides quick access to travel-related services and facilities.Examples of information that might be included are the location, operating hours, andavailability of food, lodging, parking, auto repair, hospitals, and police facilities. Travelerservices information would be accessible in the home, office or other public locations toplan trips, and would also be available en-route. When fully deployed, this service will

25


connect users and providers interactively to request and provide needed information. Acomprehensive, integrated service could support financial transactions, such as automaticbilling for purchases.

. Traffic Control

Manages the movement of traffic on streets and highways.

The traffic control user service provides for the integration and adaptive control of thefreeway and surface street systems to improve the flow of traffic, give preference to publicsafety, transit or other high occupancy vehicles, and minimize congestion whilemaximizing the movement of people and goods. Through appropriate traffic controls, theservice also promotes the safety of non-vehicular travelers, such as pedestrians andbicyclists. It requires advanced surveillance of traffic flows, analysis techniques fordetermining appropriate traffic signal and ramp metering controls, and communication ofthese controls to the roadside infrastructure. This service gathers data from thetransportation system and organizes it into usable information to determine the optimumassignment of right-of-way to vehicles and pedestrians. The real-time traffic informationcollected by the Traffic Control service also provides the foundation for many other userservices.

. Incident Management

Helps public and private organizations quickly identify incidents and implement aresponse to minimize their effects on traffic.

The Incident Management service uses advanced sensors, data processing, andcommunications to improve the incident management and response capabilities oftransportation and public safety officials, the towing and recovery industry, and othersinvolved in incident response. The service will enhance existing incident detection andverification capabilities to help these groups quickly and accurately identify a variety ofincidents and implement a response. The improved response time will minimize theeffects of these incidents on the movement of people and goods. This service will alsohelp transportation officials predict traffic or highway conditions so that they can takeaction in advance to prevent potential incidents or minimize their impacts. While thedirect users of this service are the public and private entities responsible for incidentdetection and response, the ultimate beneficiaries are commercial and transit operators, andthe traveling public.

26


. Emissions Testing and Mitigation

Provides information for monitoring air quality and developing air quality improvementstrategies.

The Emissions Testing and Mitigation service uses advanced vehicle emissions testingsystems to provide information to identify environmental “hot spots” and implementstrategies to either reroute traffic around sensitive air quality areas or control access tosuch areas. Other technologies provide identification of vehicles that are emitting levelsof pollutants that exceed state, local or regional standards, and provides information todrivers or fleet operators to enable them to take corrective action. The service alsoprovides transportation planning and operating agencies with information that can be usedto facilitate implementation and evaluation of various pollution control strategies.

3.2 Travel Demand ‘Management

The Travel Demand Management user services support policies and strategies that are aimedat reducing vehicle demand by developing and encouraging modes of travel other than thesingle occupant vehicle. The services in this bundle are designed to increase the use of highoccupancy vehicles and transit by providing intermodal information to travelers prior to thebeginning of a trip, and by making ride sharing and transit more convenient and easier to use.These services are also aimed at decreasing congestion by altering the timing or location oftrips, or eliminating vehicle trips all together.

From a technical perspective, these services rely on information collected and processed bythe Travel and Transportation Management services and the Public Transportation Operationsservices. Travel Demand Management services also interact with the Travel andTransportation Management services in terms of implementing control strategies that canprovide incentives, or disincentives, to change travel behavior.

. Demand Management and Operations

Supports policies and regulations designed to mitigate the environmental and socialimpacts of traffic congestion.

The Demand Management and Operations service generates and communicatesmanagement and control strategies that support the implementation of programs to reducethe number of individuals who choose to drive alone, especially to work; increase the useof high occupancy vehicles, transit, and commuter rail: and provide a variety of mobilityoptions for those who wish to travel in a more efficient manner, for example in non-peakperiods. Demand management strategies could ultimately be applied dynamically, when

27


congestion or pollution conditions warrant. For example, disincentives such as increasedtolls and parking fees could be applied during pollution alerts or peak travel periods, whiletransit fares would be lowered to accommodate the increased number of travelers changingmodes from driving alone. Such strategies will reduce the negative impacts of trafficcongestion on the environment and improve overall quality of life.

. Pre-Trip Travel Information

Provides information for selecting the best transportation mode, departure time, and route.

Pre-trip travel information allows travelers to access a complete range of intermodaltransportation information at home, work, and other major sites where trips originate.Real-time information on transit and commuter rail routes, schedules, transfers, fares, andride matching services are available to encourage the use of alternatives to the singleoccupancy vehicle. Information needed for long, inter-urban or vacation trips would alsobe available. Real-time information on accidents, road construction, alternate routes,traffic speeds along given routes, parking conditions, event schedules, and weatherinformation is also included. Based on this information, the traveler can select the bestroute, modes of travel and departure time, or decide not to make the trip at all.

. Ride Matching and Reservation

Makes ride sharing easier and more convenient.

The Ride Matching and Reservation service provides real-time ride matching informationand reservations to users in their homes, offices or other locations, and assisttransportation providers, as well as van/carpoolers, with vehicle assignments andscheduling. This will expand the market for ridesharing as an alternative to singleoccupant vehicle travel and will provide for enhanced alternatives for special populationgroups, such as the elderly or the handicapped.

3.3 Public Transportation Operations

The Public Transportation Operations bundle reflects the commonality of the transit authorityas the most probable provider of these services. The transit authority is responsible forimplementing systems that are capable of better managing the public transportation systemand providing improved transit and mode choice information.

From a technical perspective, all of these user services will share a common public transitdatabase. The data will be available for all of the services to customize for their specificfunction. This data will also support services in the Travel and Transportation Managementand the Travel Demand Management bundles.

28


. Public Transportation Management

Automates operations, planning, and management functions of public transit systems.

The Public Transportation Management service provides computer analysis of real-timevehicle and facility status to improve transit operations and maintenance. The analysisidentifies deviations from schedule and provides potential solutions to dispatchers anddrivers. Integrating this capability with traffic control services can help maintaintransportation schedules and assure transfer connections in intermodal transportation.Information regarding passenger loading, bus running times, and mileage accumulated willhelp improve service and facilitate administrative reporting. Transit personnelmanagement is enhanced by automatically recording and verifying tasks performed bytransit personnel.

. En-Route Transit Information

Provides information to travelers using public transportation after they begin their trips.

The En-Route Transit Information service provides information to assist the traveler oncepublic transportation travel begins. Real-time, accurate transit service information on-board the vehicle helps travelers make effective transfer decisions and itinerarymodifications as needed while a trip is underway.

. Personalized Public Transit

Provides flexibly-routed transit vehicles to offer more convenient customer service.

Small publicly or privately-operated vehicles provide on-demand routing to pick uppassengers who have requested service and deliver them to their destinations. Routedeviation schemes, in which vehicles leave a fixed route for a short distance to pick up ordischarge passengers, is another way of improving service. Vehicles can include smallbuses, taxicabs, or other small, shared ride vehicles. This service can provide almostdoor-to-door service, expanding transit coverage to lesser populated locations andneighborhoods. Potentially, this services can provide transportation at lower cost and withgreater convenience than conventional fixed route transit.

29


. Public Travel Security

Creates a secure environment for public transportation patrons and operators.

This service provides systems that monitor the environment in transportation stations,parking lots, bus stops, and on-board transit vehicles, and generate alarms, eitherautomatically or manually, when necessary. This improves security for both transit ridersand operators. Transportation agencies and authorities can integrate this user service withother anti-crime activities.

3.4 Electronic Payment

While this bundle contains only one user service, it supports deployment of many otherservices, both within and outside the transportation arena. This service will be developed,deployed, and operated by both public and private organizations.

. Electronic Payment Services

Allows travelers to pay for transportation services electronically.

Electronic Payment services will foster intermodal travel by providing a commonelectronic payment medium for all transportation modes and functions, including tolls,transit fares, and parking. The service provides for a common service fee and payment .structure using “smart cards” or other technologies. Such systems could be expanded to .become truly multi-use, accommodating personal financial transactions that are made withtoday’s credit/bank cards. The flexibility that electronic payment services offer will alsofacilitate travel demand management, if conditions warrant. They could, if localauthorities so choose, enable application of road pricing policies which could influencedeparture times and mode selection.

3.5 Commercial Vehicle Operations

These user services support the goals of improving the efficiency and safety of commercialfleet operations, and will benefit both the States and the motor carrier industry. Thus theCVO bundle reflects the commonality of using advanced computer and communicationstechnologies to improve the safety and productivity of the motor carrier industry throughoutNorth America.

From a technical perspective, the foundation for all of the CVO user services is informationsystems. Each service will require some set of information on the motor carrier, the vehicle,the driver, and, in some cases, the cargo. The services are interrelated in terms of the specific

30


types and functionality of information and data required. This network of information will beaccessible by States and motor carriers nationwide.

. Commercial Vehicle Electronic Clearance

Facilitates domestic and international border clearance, minimizing stops.

This service will enable transponder-equipped trucks and buses to have their safety status,credentials, and weight checked at mainline speeds. Vehicles that are safe and legal andhave no outstanding out-of-service citations will be allowed to pass the inspection/weighfacility without delay.

By working with Mexico and Canada, a more efficient traffic flow would be provided atborder crossings. The deployment of technologies in these countries could ultimatelyprevent overweight, unsafe, or improperly registered vehicles from entering the UnitedStates.

. Automated Roadside Safety Inspection

Facilitates roadside inspections.

Automated roadside inspections would allow real-time access at the roadside to the safetyperformance record of carriers, vehicles, and drivers. Such access will help determinewhich vehicle or driver should be stopped for an inspection, as well as ensuring timelycorrection of previously identified problems.

This service would also automate as many items as possible of the manual inspectionprocess. It would, for example, allow for more rapid and accurate inspection of brakeperformance at the roadside. Through the use of sensors and diagnostics, it wouldefficiently check vehicle systems and driver requirements and ultimately driver alertnessand fitness for duty.

. On-Board Safety Monitoring

Senses the safety status of a commercial vehicle, cargo, and driver.

On-board systems would monitor the safety status of a vehicle, cargo, and driver atmainline speeds. Vehicle monitoring would include sensing and collecting data on thecondition of critical vehicle components such as brakes, tires, and lights, and determiningthresholds for warnings and countermeasures. Cargo monitoring would involve sensingunsafe conditions relating to vehicle cargo, such as shifts in cargo while the vehicle is inoperation. Driver monitoring is envisioned to include the monitoring of driving time and

31


alertness using non-intrusive technology and the development of warning systems for thedriver, the carrier, and the enforcement official. A warning of unsafe condition wouldfirst be provided to the driver and then to the carrier and roadside enforcement officials.This warning notification would possibly prevent an accident from happening. Thisservice would minimize driver- and equipment-related accidents for participating carriers.

. Commercial Vehicle Administrative Processes

Provides electronic purchasing of credentials and automated mileage and fuel reportingand auditing.

The Commercial Vehicle Administrative Processes service provides the commercial carrierwith the capability to electronically purchase annual and temporary credentials viacomputer link. It will reduce burdensome paperwork and processing time for both theState agencies and the motor carriers.

For automated mileage and fuel reporting and auditing, this service enables participatinginterstate carriers to electronically capture mileage, fuel purchased, trip, and vehicle dataaccording to state. It would also automatically determine mileage traveled and fuelpurchased in each state, for use by the carrier in preparing fuel tax and registration reportsto the State agencies. This service would reduce the significant administrative burden oncommercial carriers to collect and report mileage and fuel purchased within each State.

. Hazardous Material Incident Response

Provides immediate description of hazardous materials to emergency responders.

The Hazardous Material Incident Response service enhances the safety of shipments ofhazardous materials by providing enforcement and response teams with timely, accurateinformation on cargo contents to enable them to react properly in emergency situations.The materials or combination of materials involved when an incident involving a truck orrailcar carrying hazardous material occurs would be provided electronically to emergencyresponders and enforcement personnel at the scene so that the incident can be handledproperly.

- Freight Mobility

Provides communication between drivers, dispatchers, and intermodal transportationproviders.

The Freight Mobility service provides real-time traffic information and vehicle location forcommercial vehicles. This service significantly enhances fleet operations management by

32


helping drivers to avoid congested areas and improving the reliability and efficiency ofpickups and deliveries. These benefits are particularly important for operators ofintermodal and time-sensitive fleets who can use this ITS service to make their operationsmore efficient and reliable.

3.6 Emergency Management

Police, fire and rescue operations can use emergency management services to improve theirmanagement of and response to emergency situations. These user services have commonfunctional elements such as vehicle location, communications, and response.

. Emergency Notification and Personal Security

Provides immediate notification of an incident and an immediate request for assistance.

The Emergency Notification and Personal Security service includes two capabilities: driverand personal security, and automatic collision notification. Driver and personal securitycapabilities provide for user-initiated distress signals for incidents such as mechanicalbreakdowns or car-jackings. When activated by an incident, automatic collisionnotification transmits information regarding location, nature, and severity of the crash toemergency personnel.

- Emergency Vehicle Management

Reduces the time it takes for emergency vehicles to respond to an incident.

The Emergency Vehicle Management service provides public safety agencies with fleetmanagement capabilities, route guidance, and signal priority and/or preemption foremergency vehicles. Fleet management improves the display of emergency vehiclelocations and help dispatchers send the units that can most quickly reach an incident site.Route guidance directs emergency vehicles to an incident location and signal priorityoptimizes the traffic signal timing in an emergency vehicle’s route. Primary users of thisservice include police, fire, and medical units.

3.7 Advanced Vehicle Control and Safety Systems

Although each of these services addresses a separate function, they all contribute to thecommon goal of improving vehicle safety. With the exception of Automated HighwaySystems (AHS), all of these user services are characterized by near-term reliance on self-contained systems within the vehicle. The functionality of these user services, however, canbe enhanced by supplementing the on-board capabilities with additional sensors deployed inthe infrastructure.

33


Within the vehicle, common functional elements, such as data storage, processing units,sensors, or actuators, could be shared among the user services in this bundle, including AHS.

. Longitudinal Collision Avoidance

Helps prevent head-on, rear-end or backing collisions between vehicles, or betweenvehicles and other objects or pedestrians.

The Longitudinal Collision Avoidance service helps reduce the number and severity oflongitudinal collisions, such as head-on, rear-end or backing. It includes the sensing ofpotential or impending collisions, prompting a driver’s avoidance actions, and controllingthe vehicle temporarily.

. Lateral Collision Avoidance

Helps prevent collisions when vehicles leave their lane of travel.

The Lateral Collision Avoidance service provides crash warnings and controls for lanechanges and road departures. It will reduce the number of lateral collisions involving twoor more vehicles, as well as, crashes involving a single vehicle leaving the roadway.For changing lanes, a situation display can monitor the vehicle’s blind spot continuously ,and drivers can be actively warned of an impending collision. If needed, automaticcontrol can provide rapid response to a situation. Warning systems can also alert a driverto an impending road departure, provide help in keeping the vehicle in the lane, andultimately provide automatic control of steering and throttle.

. Intersection Collision Avoidance

Helps prevent collisions at intersections.

The Intersection Collision Avoidance service warns drivers of imminent collisions whenapproaching or crossing an intersection or railroad grade crossing that has traffic control(e.g., stop signs or a signal). This service also alerts the driver when the proper right-of-way at the intersection or grade crossing is unclear or ambiguous.

. Vision Enhancement for Crash Avoidance

Improves the driver’s ability to see the roadway and objects that are on or along theroadway.

The Vision Enhancement service provides drivers with improved visibility to allow themto avoid collisions with other vehicles, obstacles in the roadway, or parked or moving

34


trains, as well as help them comply with traffic signs and signals. This service requiresin-vehicle equipment for sensing potential hazards, processing this information, anddisplaying it in a way that is useful to a driver.

. Safety Readiness

Provides warnings about the condition of the driver, the vehicle, and the roadway.

Safety Readiness services provide in-vehicle equipment that unobtrusively monitors adriver’s condition and provides a warning if the driver is becoming drowsy or otherwiseimpaired. This service could also monitor critical components of the automobile internallyand alert the driver to impending malfunctions. Equipment within the vehicle could alsodetect unsafe road conditions, such as bridge icing or standing water on the roadway, andprovide a warning to the driver.

. Pre-Crash Restraint Deployment

Anticipates an imminent collision and activates passenger safety systems before thecollision occurs or much earlier in the crash event than is currently feasible.

The Pre-Crash Restraint Deployment service anticipates an imminent collision bydetermining the velocity, mass, and direction of the vehicles or objects involved in apotential crash. The service activates safety systems in the vehicle prior to a collision,such as tightening lap-shoulder belts, arming and deploying air bags at the optimalpressure, and deploying roll bars. The response is based on the number, location, andmajor physical characteristics of any occupants.

. Automated Highway Systems

Provides a fully automated, “hands-off,” operating environment.

AHS is a long-term goal of ITS which would provide vast improvements in safety bycreating a nearly accident-free driving environment. In AHS, the vehicle is guidedautomatically rather than by the driver. Driver error is reduced or possibly eliminatedwith full implementation. Drivers could buy vehicles with the necessary instrumentationor retrofit an existing vehicle. AHS benefits include increased roadway capacity,enhanced safety, reduced fuel consumption, and reduced emissions.

4.0 USER SERVICE DEVELOPMENT PLANS

Development plans have been generated for each user service. Each User ServiceDevelopment Plan identifies the needs that the user service is designed to meet, presents an

35


operational concept for how the service might function in its fully deployed state, describesthe technologies that the service might use, discusses potential costs and benefits, andprovides an assessment of the public and private sector roles in developing and deploying thesystems that will provide the service. The User Service Plans identify major issues or barriersthat might impact development and deployment and the activities and milestones that must beaccomplished to fully develop the service for system deployment. Detailed User ServiceDevelopment Plans that describe the activities needed to bring each service to the point ofdeployment are contained in Volume II.

Features of the User Service Development Plans include:

. User service development plans address the stated goals of the ITS program and provide aframework by which user services can be combined, or bundled, into deployable productsand services to achieve these goals and objectives.

. An assessment of the roles of key public and private sector participants involved in thedevelopment and deployment of the service are described in the user service plans.

. However, the user service development plans do not define development or deploymentpolicies. The decision to undertake the necessary activities to develop a user service restswith the individual public or private sector entities involved. Similarly, deploymentpriorities and decisions rest with the responsible deploying entity, private or public sectorprovider, and the consumer.

. The user service development plans are intended to be illustrative without defining orimplying a specific system architecture. The operational concepts and technologiesdescribed in the User Service Development Plans present a vision of how the servicesmight be deployed, rather than dictating a deployment scenario. Thus, the activitieswithin the development plans do not dictate the use of specific technologies, but simplypresent the possibilities as they are known currently.

. Similarly, the user service development plans do not dictate specific future activities, butare planning tools to guide and coordinate future activities.

l The user service development plans are dynamic. They will evolve as technology andexperience change both public and private sector perceptions of the possibilities.

l Unique safety, human factors, and institutional issues are covered in each user servicedevelopment plan. Cross-cutting issues are covered in other sections of the NPP.

36


. User acceptance of ITS user services will be the key to their success. Outreach, educationand training, in both technical and public relations areas, must be addressed throughout allstages of user service development and planning.

l General information and cost and benefit estimates are contained in the user servicedevelopment plans. Benefits and costs are rarely quantifiable for most services at theircurrent stage of development. However, the relationships between costs and benefits arelogically supportable.

5.0 CONCLUSION

Twenty-nine user services have been defined to meet the goals and objectives of the ITSprogram. These user services are grouped into seven bundles according to technological orinstitutional commonalities. User Services Development Plans have been generated for eachof the user services. The User Service Development Plans address the activities needed toreach deployment of systems that provide these user services and to achieve the goalsenvisioned for the national ITS program by Congress, the general public, and the public andprivate sector participants.

37

I- NATIONAL ITS PROGRAM PLAN CHAPTER IV - NATIONAL COMPATIBILITY

CHAPTER IV - NATIONAL COMPATIBILITY

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Since the enactment of ISTEA, there has been a widely recognized need for ensuring that ITSdevelops in the United States in a manner that will ensure system interoperability nationwide.ISTEA states that the United Sates Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT) shall promotenational compatibility, and ITS America conveyed formal advice to the US. DOT toundertake the development of a national ITS architecture which would identify the need forpotential standards. The national ITS architecture and the development of standards willprovide a framework from which an ITS program can be developed. This chapter describesthese formal, on-going activities. In addition, this chapter addresses the current activities andissues in the telecommunications area. Telecommunications systems form the backbone forITS since it relies heavily on the movement of information. Collectively, the outcomes of thearchitecture, standards, and telecommunications activities will contribute to the unification oftechnologically capable ITS into a coherent, interoperable national system.

2.0 NATIONAL ITS ARCHITECTURE

Development and deployment of an ITS, which is compatible on a national scale, requires asupporting framework to describe the governing plan and define the relationships among thesystem components. This framework is a system architecture. The goal of the ITSarchitecture is the definition of an integrated system whose component subsystems operatesynergistically to provide compatible products, interoperability, and a full range of userservices nationwide. Since the architecture will identify and describe component interactions,standards and protocols that do not exist for these interfaces can be identified and developed.ITS will be in a continuous state of evolution requiring the architecture to accommodate thereplacement and expansion of components without the disruption of previously implementedsystems. An open architecture fosters interoperable products that can compete on their meritsin price and performance. ITS customers, be they private sector entities, governmentagencies, or individuals, will be able to choose from a variety of vendors.

The framework for providing ITS program direction will be a system architecture that depictsthe master plan, defines the relationship among system components, allocates functions tosubsystems, identifies the types of products and infrastructure needed to satisfy systemrequirements, and reflects stakeholder consensus.

2.1 Program Process

The national ITS architecture is being developed with a broadly based consensus and with fullconsideration of the public interest. Because the architecture must be capable of supporting

38


effective, nationwide exploitation of technologies in areas such as surveillance,communications, data management, and control software, the development process employsthe diverse talents and resources of varied, interested constituencies. Multiple consortia orcontract teams were selected to participate in a two-phased architecture development program.The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) within the U.S. DOT is overseeing andguiding the National ITS Architecture Development Program. In Phase I, the contract teamswere led by Hughes Aircraft, Loral, Rockwell International and Westinghouse Electric. Eachteam developed competing candidate architectures. The teams with the most promisingarchitectures were selected to continue during Phase II. Phase II will be conducted in anopen, non-competitive environment where all participants will contribute to the developmentof a single, consensus architecture. The major objective of this two phase process is todefine, evaluate and establish an open, national ITS architecture. As the architecturedevelopment program evolves, one of the crucial outcomes will be the ITS community’sability to work together in pursuit of common goals, thereby creating a mechanism forlong-term cooperative undertakings. ITS America is working with the non-Federalgovernment bodies, academia, special interest groups, the private sector, and private citizensto provide them the opportunity to participate and influence the architecture.

2.1.1 Phase I

The Phase I procurement began in September 1993 and continued through January 1995. TheFHWA solicited proposals from multiple teams to conduct parallel efforts to define andevaluate an initial open, national ITS architecture. The four selected consortia teams worked .independently during Phase I. The candidate architectures included system and subsystemdescriptions, information flows and subsystem interface specifications. They alsoaccommodated the requirements derived from the ITS User Services.

The basis for the ITS architectural development process was the formal, iterative systemsengineering review process. The organizational interaction among the program participantsinvolved was centered on the contract team products and the product reviews. The Phase Idocuments, listed below, were produced by each of the four teams and made available inOctober 1994.

- Mission Definition . Initial Performance and Benefits Summary. Vision Statement . Architecture Evaluation Plan. Traceability Matrix . Feasibility Study (including Risk Analysis). Logical Architecture . Initial Cost Analysis. Physical Architecture - Evolutionary Deployment Strategy- Analysis of Data Loading Requirements . Preliminary Evaluation Results Summary

39


2.1.1.1 Down-select

The down-select process, included as part of Phase I, began in October 1994 and concluded inJanuary 1995. The objective of the down-select process was to identify the contract teamswith the most promising candidate architectures. The selected teams will participate in a non-competitive manner in the development of the single ITS architecture in Phase II. Eachteam’s candidate architecture was evaluated against criteria designed to measure its potentialfor advancing national ITS goals and objectives. The response of the ITS stakeholders duringthe consensus process was also taken into consideration in the down-select decision.

The down-select factors included Phase I architecture evaluations of the institutional andtechnological areas listed below and Phase II technical proposal evaluations.

. Technical and performance considerations

. Operational safety, reliability, maintainabilityand availability

. Programmatic risk associated with deployment,implementation and market acceptability

. User acceptance

. Cost considerations

. Demonstrated benefit

. Institutional and economic issues

The consortia teams led by Loral and Rockwell International were down-selected in January1995 to continue the architecture development in Phase II.

2.1.2 Phase II

Phase II began in February 1995 and is scheduled for completion by mid-1996. This phasewill be performed in stages. The first stage will be approximately six months in duration andwill consist of the detailed refinement of the down-selected architectures by the selectedcontract teams. The selected contract teams will perform detailed analyses and systemmodeling to evaluate the Phase I architectures. The major activities during Phase II willinclude:

. Continued definition and refinement of candidate architectures;

. Development of evolutionary deployment strategies, to include identification and analysesof potential obstacles impeding deployment of ITS and services;

. In-depth analytical efforts and modeling required for complete and effective evaluation ofthe competing architectures, which accommodate urban, rural, and inter-urban scenarios infive-, ten-, and twenty-year timeframes; and

. The development of system performance projections and life cycle cost estimates

40


Phase II will be accomplished in a non-competitive environment and the teams will establishworking groups for the second stage of Phase II activities. The second stage of Phase IIinvolves synthesizing the different architectures into a single architecture. This stage isexpected to be six to nine months in duration. The teams will work together to incorporatethe best attributes of their approaches into a single architecture. After the final architecturehas been completed, the supporting documentation will be developed during the remainder ofPhase II.

2.1.3 The Need for Consensus

One of the predominant challenges associated with developing a national ITS is the diversityof participants who must be involved in shaping the program. While challenging, thisdiversity holds the key to ultimate success through broadly-based support from all parties inthe public-private partnership. The critical element in gaining broad support is early andcontinuing involvement by all stakeholders.

The objectives of the consensus building program are to:

. Ensure consideration of stakeholder perspectives, and

. Ensure the broadest possible acceptance of the selected architecture.

The need for a consensus-based architecture is highlighted by the diverse contributors to thedevelopment, production, marketing, and adoption of ITS. Consumers will require confidence .in the interoperability and long-term utility of ITS products. State and local governmentsinvesting in infrastructure, as well as private sector providers undertaking privatization ofsome traditionally government roles, will rely on the architecture to avoid product and systemincompatibilities. The development of a broadly accepted architecture will identify interfacesrequiring standardization to support national marketing strategies.

U.S. DOT and ITS America began the consensus-building process early in 1993 when itformed the ITS Architecture Consensus Task Force. The task force is comprised ofapproximately 40 ITS stakeholders, primarily from associations, societies, and interest groups.This Task Force disseminated information about the architecture program and supported theConsensus Building Team’s efforts to address the interests of a broad range of stakeholders.Other elements of the consensus-building process include public forums throughout thecountry, committee activities, and focus groups to provide feedback on the architectures.

2.1.4 The End Product

The culmination of the Phase II architecture development process is the development of anationwide, ITS architecture that facilitates the application of technologies to the reduction ofsurface transportation problems. The architecture will provide a framework for the

41


development of ITS and will enhance the compatibility of system deployments. During itsdevelopment, the architecture will be influenced by currently deployed ITS, on-going trends inthe research and development communities, and operational tests that provide real-worldresults from the field. When completed, the architecture will also facilitate the identificationof areas that can benefit from future research. These research areas could be pursued througheither operational tests or research and development programs.

The architecture will accommodate the private sector’s, state and local transportation agencies’,and private citizens’ needs, such as supporting congestion relief, improved public safety,environmental improvements, more effective intermodal transportation and the provision of acost effective mix of services.

Selecting a national architecture provides leverage for deploying ITS services and products.The architecture will identify guidelines and interface and interoperability standards thatshould be developed and adopted. The resulting, comprehensive set of standards will catalyzedeployment, especially by private sector providers. The private sector will undertakeproduction and marketing initiatives in response to the risk reduction fostered by compatibilityand increasing public acceptance of ITS. The assurance of nationally compatible deploymentopportunities provides incentive for industry investment and confidence in future ITSexpansion.

3.0 STANDARDS

Standards are a strategic element of accelerating ITS development and deployment. Theyfacilitate national and global compatibility, interoperability, and can positively influenceproduct design, manufacturability, operation, maintainability, performance, quality, safety, andcost. Principal standards-setting organizations are assessing the types of standards needed forITS, and some standards development is in process. The national ITS architecture willprovide a framework for identifying additional standards. Organizations are also formulatinga process for coordinating ITS standards development. This section describes theorganizational roles and relationships, current standards activities, and standards-settingprocesses.

3.1 Standards-Setting Organization Roles, Relationships, and Activities

3.1.1 Transportation Agencies

The U.S. DOT and its administrations, particularly the FHWA, the Federal TransitAdministration (FTA), and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),have key roles in ITS standards development. These agencies can use operational test results,on-going deployment experience, and public safety issues to contribute to the standards-settingprocess. The Federal government role in the standards process is dependent on the particular

42


type of standard. The government has a direct and primary role in adopting regulatorystandards that assure and promote safety and the public welfare. In the development ofindustry consensus standards, government representatives can (and should) participate inefforts in which it has a technical or strategic interest, on the same basis as other interestedmembers of the ITS community.

3.1.2 Utilized Federal Advisory Committee

ITS America, a utilized Federal Advisory Committee for the U.S. DOT, helps to guide ITSstandards development. The ITS America Standards and Protocols Committee, whosemembership represents government authorities, private sector stakeholders, and academicorganizations, is chartered to “serve as an oversight and coordinating committee for allstandards activities in the U.S. relating to ITS.” The Committee identifies the needs andrequirements for ITS standards, including intermodal or cross-modal standards. Oncestandards requirements are identified, the Committee works with standards developingorganizations (SDO) to assure the coordinated development of needed standards. Although itis a member of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI), the Committee does notcreate standards; the Committee looks to traditional SDOs for standards development andwould create standards only when no SD0 is available to do so. In general, the Standardsand Protocols Committee identifies the need for a standard, promotes effective communicationamong standards-interested parties, and coordinates efforts to maximize efficiency. TheCommittee is in the process of developing an ITS standards database which will identifyexisting ITS-related standards, standards in development, future standards required, current .research and test results that could impact standards, and future research and tests needed forstandards. The standards database will reside in the ITS America International ITSInformation Clearinghouse. The ITS America Standards and Protocols Committee willreview, comment on, and monitor the ITS national architecture development for impacts onstandards requirements. The Committee will also issue a formal Standards Development Planwhich will identify standards priorities and provide a standards development timeframe.

3.1.3 National Laboratories

Two National Laboratories are performing management and research tasks which facilitatestandards development: Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) and Oak Ridge National Laboratory(ORNL). JPL is the U.S. DOT’s ITS Architecture Manager and acts as a liaison between thearchitecture development teams and the SDOs. JPL led a task force that identified whatexisting and proposed standards can be used and what standards need to be developed. JPL isworked with ITS America on this activity. The results of their analysis are documented in acomprehensive catalog of ITS standards and protocols. The catalog contains an organizedlisting of ITS technology standards and interface protocols with current status and probabletime frame for completion. It will evolve over time and will be available to the ITScommunity for comment and further contribution. JPL published a standards and protocols

43


catalog in September 1994. The catalog is available to the ITS community for comment andfurther contribution. The catalog will evolve over time as updates are provided. The catalogwill be used as the basis for the database described in Paragraph 3.1.2. ORNL is developinga standard Location Reference System (LRS) which will facilitate the dissemination of real-time traffic data and other spatially-related attributes between dissimilar map databases. TheLRS will provide a mechanism to compensate for inherent differences in spatial accuracy,completeness, and currency. The LRS is being developed through a consensus processinvolving public and private industries and academia. ORNL is scheduled to produce a draftstandard LRS during March of 1995 and will provide final LRS recommendations inSeptember of 1995.

3.1.4 Standards Developing Organizations

SDOs have the role of authoring standards through a consensus process among industryexperts, user community representatives, and general interest groups. SDOs are activelypursuing ITS standards development. A table of some of the U.S. SDOs, their particulartopics of concentration within ITS, and their current standards activities is provided in Table4-l. In addition to the SDOs in Table 4-1, the Radio Broadcast Data System Subcommitteeof the National Radio Systems Committee (NRSC), sponsored by the Electronics IndustryAssociation (EIA), has prepared a draft U.S. standard for FM subcarrier broadcast trafficinformation. Also, the National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA) has developeda draft National Traffic Control/ITS Communications Protocol (NTCIP) during 1994 tostandardize the interface among traffic sensors, traffic controls, and traffic managementsystems. The ANSI Tl Committee is developing wireline and wireless telecommunicationsstandards that could be used for ITS applications.

The International Standards Organization Technical Committee 204 (ISO/TC 204), titledTransport Information and Control Systems (TICS), is developing international ITS standards.ISO/TC 204 is organized into the following working groups:

ArchitectureQuality and Reliability Requirements .TICS Database TechnologyFee and Toll Collection .General Fleet ManagementCommercial/Freight FleetManagementPublic Transport/Emergency Fleet .ManagementIntegrated Transport Information,Management, and Control

Traveller Information SystemsRoute Guidance and Navigation SystemsParking Management/Off-Road CommercialHuman Factors and Man Machine InterfaceVehicle/Roadway Warning and Control SystemsDedicated Short Range Communications forTICS ApplicationsWide Area Communications/Protocols andInterfaces

44


Table 4-1 Standards Developing Organizations

SD0 ITS Standards TopicsAddressed

Standards Activities

ASTM(AmericanSociety forTesting andMaterials)

Vehicle-to-roadside . Specification for Highway Weigh-in-Motioncommunications, traffic Systems with User Requirements and Testcharacteristics, traffic Methodand application device . Practice for Highway Traffic Monitoringinterconnection - Practice for Classifying Highway Vehicles fromprotocols, smart Known Axle Count and Spacingmaterials and systems . Practice for Rubber Tubing for Traffic Counters/

Classifiers

EIA (ElectronicIndustriesAssociation)

. Practice for Dedicated, Short Range, Two-wayVehicle-to-Roadside Communications Equipment

. Specification for Data Formats from Traffic DataCollection Equipment

. Guide Network Level Pavement Management

R-3, audio systems and . Radio Broadcast Data SystemR-4, video systems . High Speed FM Subcarrier

. Digital Audio Radio

. National Data Broadcasting Committee

IEEE (Institute Communications, . Vehicle Radarfor Electrical and electrical and software . Lightning Protection for ITS ApplicationsElectronics safety, and other topics . Personal Communication Systems ApplicationsEngineers) within the field of within ITS

electrotechnology Also developing:. Dictionary and glossary of ITS terms. Standard protocols and message sets for vehicle-

to-roadside communications. Guidelines for the systems design applications,

procurement, construction, installation,maintenance, and operation of ITScommunications systems

ION (Institute of Navigation systems . Recommended Practice for Benchmarking theNavigation) Positioning Performance of a Navigation System

ITE (Institute of Equipment and . Controller CabinetsTransportation Material Standards . Standard Vehicle DetectorsEngineers) . Model Performance Specifications for Paint,

Powder, and Plastic Pavement Markings. Specifications for retroactive White, Yellow, and

Black Thermoplastic Marking Materials

45


Table 4-1 Standards Developing Organizations

SD0 ITS Standards TopicsAssressed

Standards Activities

NEMA (National Communication . National Tele-Communications IVHS ProtocolElectrical protocols . Software protocols for in-vehicle communicationManufacturers . Traffic control for ITSAssociation)

TIA (Telecom- Mobile communications . Digital Two-way Mobile Communicationmunications systems SystemsIndustry . Cellular and Personal CommunicationsAssociation) Equipment and Services

SAE (Society of Vehicle components Recommended Practices:Automotive and/or systems . Interface Between an On-Board Computer and aEngineers) interacting with a Communications Device

vehicle . Navigation Message Set. On-Board Land Vehicle Positioning Device. In-Vehicle Sensor Interface for ITS Applications. Traveler Information Service Message List. Location Referencing System Data DictionaryStandard:. Map Database Truth-In-Labeling

Many of the ISO/TC 204 working groups are coordinated with the European Committee forStandardization (CEN/TC 278.) The Secretariat for ISO/TC 204 is held by the U.S. through theSociety of Automotive Engineers. ITS America is the U.S. Technical Advisory Group (TAG)Administrator for ISO/TC 204. U.S. involvement at these levels demonstrates a significant nationalinterest in ITS and increases the market potential for U.S. products and services.

3.2 Standards-Setting Process

An overall process for determining the ITS standards requirements and coordinating thestandards development process is being formulated by the ITS America Standards andProtocols Committee. This process will promote the timely identification and development ofneeded standards and help to eliminate redundant standards activities. The processes bywhich individual standards are written, reviewed, approved, and published are generally well-defined by each of the SDOs, typically in accordance with the guidelines established byANSI. Standards are set through a collaborative effort between industry experts, usercommunity representatives, and general interest groups.

46

I- NATIONAL ITS PROGRAM PLAN CHAPTER N - NATIONAL COMPATIBILITY

4.0 TELECOMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS

Telecommunications systems are a combination of facilities, stations, and electronic circuitsthat transfer information through wireline (copper, coaxial, and fiber optics), and wireless(radio frequency and infrared) communications media. Telecommunications systems at thelocal, regional, state and national level will provide a means for infrastructure-vehicle,infrastructure-traveler, and vehicle-vehicle ITS information exchange as required by the userservices. For example, real-time traffic information may be exchanged between mobile users(i.e., vehicles and Personal Communication Systems (PCS) users) and the infrastructure toassist in route guidance. Safety, credential, size, weight, and cargo data can be communicatedfrom a commercial vehicle to the infrastructure for electronic compliance checks and weigh-in-motion (WIM). Examples of other ITS information that can be transferred viatelecommunications systems are: automatic vehicle identification and location, traffic controlinformation, traffic surveillance data, information for display on variable message signsinteragency coordination messages, database processing messages, intermodal data for rail andtransit, and traffic predictions. As discussed in Chapter V User Services Integration,telecommunications is a critical component in implementing almost all of the ITS userservices.

Many SDOs, industry associations, and Spectrum Management Organizations (SMO) areestimating the telecommunications requirements necessary to develop and implement ITS.Current efforts include telecommunications standards development (described in Section 3 ofthis chapter), telecommunications technologies assessment, and radio frequency (RF) spectrum .requirements analysis and allocation. Efforts must be coordinated aong the varioustransportation modes including transit, rail, and commercial vehicles, recognizing the interestthat each has in the frequency spectrum and allocation areas. This section addresses severalaspects of ITS telecommunications systems, including technology alternatives, technologyselection criteria, deployment options, organizational roles and responsibilities, and currentactivities.

4.1 ITS Telecommunications Alternatives

The following paragraphs describe a variety of telecommunications techniques, as well assome of the particular factors that need to be considered for ITS applications. Each techniquehas its own advantages and disadvantages, depending on the specific application.

4.1.1 Telecommunications Techniques

- Wireless broadcast is a term that describes a family of communications techniques fortransmitting information one-way over large areas, without a physical connection such as acable or wire. A specific wireless broadcast technique called FM subcarrier broadcastexploits the technical features of a radio broadcast for widely disseminating information.

47


Other specific wireless broadcast examples are Highway Advisory Radio (HAR) andDigital Audio Broadcast (DAB). The wireless broadcast method of communications mightprovide a low-cost means for uniformly distributing limited traffic data to many mobileusers in a metropolitan area.

l Cellular technology is used as another wireless communications method. Cell-basedcommunications divide a given geographic area into cells, each of which employs a basestation and transmitter. The cell size is directly proportional to the transmitter’s power.The base stations are relatively low-power transmitters covering a short distance whichallows the same frequency to be “reused” in a nearby area. To increase capacity, thesystem operator can split cells into microcells by adding lower-power transmitters withsmaller zones. The net result is a flexible, growth-oriented use of capacity. Cell-basedcommunications include paging and telephone applications. Cell-based paging techniquestransmit information (messages) one-way. Cellular telephones offer a two-wayinformation exchange.

. Beacons are specialized short-range, two-way communications devices. Communicationsbetween vehicles and infrastructure occur in the vicinity of a beacon, adding position orlocation-specific content. Infrared, millimeter wave, and microwave technologies can allsupport localized beacon communications.

. Land-line communications is a term that describes a family of communications techniquesfor passing information through a physical connection such as a cable or wire. Examplesinclude common wire telephone lines and fiber optic cables. Relative to traditional wire-lines (i.e., coaxial and twisted pair), optical fiber offers higher capacity, increased speed,longer link distance, less susceptibility to severe weather, no electromagneticsusceptibility, and increased system reliability. Optical fiber is also lightweight andsmaller than traditional wire-lines. However, fiber optic cable can be more expensive toimplement and maintain than coaxial and twisted pair cable.

4.1.2 Fixed and Mobile Elements

ITS telecommunications involves information exchange among and between fixed and mobileelements. Mobile elements include vehicles and individuals with PCS, cellular telephones,and pagers. Fixed, or stationary, elements include transportation management centers,roadside equipment (infrastructure), and users with traditional fixed telecommunicationssystems in the home or office. A variety of telecommunications options exist for mobile andstationary elements, and each option has its own cost and performance trade-offs. Thesetelecommunications options are described in the following paragraphs.

48


Fixed elements, such as traffic signals and traffic management centers, can communicate overland-lines and via radio or satellite. Cable television and telephone companies have deployedand are continuing to deploy millions of miles of land-lines. A variety of technologies areavailable for fixed telecommunications including: Synchronous Optical Networks (SONET),Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM), Switched Multimegabit Data Services (SMDS), VerySmall Aperture Terminals (VSAT), Frame Relay, Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN),and Tl lines (data rate of 1.544 Megabits per second, Mbps), T3 (44.736 Mbps) lines andlower speed digital and analog services.

Mobile elements, such as vehicles and cellular telephones, can communicate over wirelessmethods. A variety of technologies either exist or are planned for mobile communications.Possible technologies for one-way mobile communications include Highway Advisory Radio(HAR), FM subcarrier, microwave, and infrared. Two-way mobile technologies includecellular, two-way radio, microwave, infrared, and two-way satellite.

Determining the location of mobile elements is one ITS telecommunications requirement thatis common to many user services such as route guidance, commercial vehicle operations, andemergency management services. Location of individual vehicles can be provided byroadside equipment such as in-pavement sensors, cameras, and radars. Also, the vehiclesthemselves can act as probes by providing useful information on position, speed, and roadconditions from in-vehicle sensors. Satellites or more traditional (terrestrial) navigationtechniques can also be used for determining vehicle position. The Global Positioning System(GPS) is a constellation of U.S. satellites that provide three dimensional position locationaround the world.

4.1.3 One-Way and Two-Way Communications

Some ITS applications can be implemented as one-way transmissions, and some require two- way interaction between ITS participants. Traffic reports, for example, could be broadcast asa one-way transmission to the vehicle. Vehicle probe reports, however, could use two-waycommunications between the vehicle and the infrastructure. Cell-based communicationsinclude wide area one-way and two-way links. Wireless broadcast schemes uniformlybroadcast information (one-way) to anybody listening.

49


4.2 ITS Telecommunications Technology Selection Criteria

Procuring organizations need to consider several key system attributes when choosing aparticular telecommunications technology. ITS telecommunications systems must be cost-efficient, reliable, maintainable, secure, and resistant to obsolescence, as well as interoperable,expandable, and compatible. High reliability is an essential system attribute to prevent lossesof critical traffic information, ensure the integrity of electronically-collected toll revenues,prevent serious traffic congestion, and ensure operation of emergency notification functions.To improve reliability, the systems should have continual monitoring, automatic outagedetection, and automatic rerouting capabilities. ITS telecommunications systems must be easyto maintain with minimum personnel at a minimum cost. Secure systems are needed toprotect the information and to prevent eavesdropping, misuse, service theft, and malicious andinadvertent intrusion. Resistance to obsolescence is necessary because ITS applications willbe deployed over several phases. Ideally, near-term hardware, software, and other networkcomponents would be compatible with equipment installed during later stages of deployment.ITS telecommunications systems must permit both geographic and vendor interoperability, aswell as support for intermodal considerations. They need to operate over a variety ofenvironments nation-wide, ranging from urban population centers to rural areas. The systemsmust be expandable so that additional capacity and additional user services can beaccommodated. ITS telecommunications systems must support both fixed and mobileapplications at both short and long ranges.

Performance, institutional, and financial issues need to be understood for each specific ITSapplication when selecting an appropriate telecommunications technology. Key performanceparameters include capacity, processing power, reliability, maintainability, operability, range,and speed. Institutional issues include privacy and the openness of architectures andstandards. Such issues can affect multi-vendor product availability, compatibility,interoperability, and the ability to accommodate growth and technological advances.Financial evaluations must consider the cost of additional communications infrastructure (ifneeded) and operations and maintenance costs over the lifetime of the system. The use ofexisting communications infrastructure can minimize deployment costs. Using vehicles asprobes, rather than using extensive roadside equipment, can reduce infrastructure operationsand maintenance costs.

The required capacity of the telecommunications system is affected by whether thearchitecture is centralized or distributed. Centralized architectures allocate the processingwithin a few components, and distributed (or de-centralized) architectures allocate theprocessing over many elements. For example, route guidance calculations in a centralizedarchitecture might be performed at a transportation management center and communicated tothe vehicles, whereas route guidance calculations in a distributed architecture might beperformed on-board individual vehicles. Estimates of message size, transaction volume, anduser volume can be used to define capacity requirements. Similarly, data loading analysesneed to be performed for each architecture option to determine capacity, configuration, andbandwidth requirements.

51


Another factor in selecting telecommunications technology is whether the deployment regionis rural or urban. In rural environments, where the density of users is low and cellular andPCS providers are not yet widely available, infrastructure costs may preclude a terrestrialcellular architecture and favor satellite communications. Mobile satellite services which willbe implemented over the next several years will be able to provide telecommunications forrural applications. However, in areas with high-rise buildings or overpasses, satellitecommunications performance degrades due to blockage. In urban areas, cellulartelecommunications is generally preferable.

One of the institutional issues which needs to be addressed is the impact the deployment ofITS technologies can have on individual privacy. For example, one-way communications donot utilize individual user identification, however it prevents the user from makingindividualized requests for information. However, technologies which permit identification ofspecific vehicles could provide law enforcement officials with information such as speed andlocation. Freight operators may want secure communications to prevent their competitionfrom accessing business-sensitive information such as when, where, and how freight is hauled.

Standards for telecommunications systems are extremely important. Standardizing the mobileuser-to-infrastructure interface increases interoperability over geographic regions. Suchstandardization can be especially important for mayday communications to and from publicsafety services. Standardized communications protocols can facilitate compatible ITSdeployment. Product performance standardization ensures equipment compatibility and fosterscompetition which lowers prices. Standardized electronic tags for toll collection, for example,ensures interoperability for a single tag over many states.

Another factor to consider is whether the standard for the telecommunications technology is“open” or not. The “openness” of a standard refers to whether it is a public standard, an openstandard available for licensing, or a vendor proprietary standard. Public standards areavailable at no cost to all users, open standards are made available at some small cost to allusers, and vendor proprietary standards are available only to either the developingorganization or to a restricted set of licensees.

The selected architecture and telecommunications technologies determine what equipmentconsumers need to purchase to access ITS information. For example, consumers may needcellular telephones, FM radios, or specialized equipment. If, as in a distributed architecture,route selection is performed within individual vehicles, the consumer would need an in-vehicle map data base and perhaps equipment to receive expected travel times from theinfrastructure. If, as in a centralized architecture, the infrastructure is highly sophisticated, thein-vehicle equipment costs are reduced.

52


4.3 Organizational Roles and Responsibilities

4.3.1 Domestic Spectrum Management Organizations

The RF spectrum to be used by ITS telecommunications systems is managed by public sectordomestic and international SMOs. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and theNational Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) are the organizationswhich manage RF spectrum in the U.S. The FCC and the NTIA perform RF spectrumallocation, allotment, and assignment. The FCC, a government agency that is subject tooversight from the U.S. Congress, manages all civil RF spectrum, including state and localgovernment uses. The NTIA manages portions of the RF spectrum used by the Federalgovernment, including the Defense Department. The NTIA organization consists ofrepresentatives from Executive Branch departments and agencies within them that are majorRF spectrum users (i.e., the Department of Transportation, the Federal AviationAdministration, all three military departments, and the National Aeronautics and SpaceAdministration). Shared frequency bands are also managed by the FCC and NTIA throughthe Interdepartment Radio Advisory Committee (IRAC).

4.3.2 International Spectrum Management Organizations

Frequency coordination across national borders is extremely important due to the potential forRF interference problems. For frequency coordination across the national borders, the U.S.has bilateral agreements with the Canadian and Mexican government agencies responsible for .RF spectrum, Industry Canada and the Secretaria de Communicaciones y Transportes de los .Estados Unidos Mexicanos, respectively. The International Telecommunications Union (ITU)coordinates frequency assignments internationally. Initially, either the FCC or the NTIA (asappropriate) reviews U.S. proposals to change International Allocations. If the proposal isacceptable, it is forwarded to the State Department for nomination to appear on the agenda ofthe next World Radio Conference (WRC). The WRC will often forward the proposal to theRadio Working Group (ITU-R) for review and approval. The ITU “registers” HF Broadcastand Satellite frequencies because they need international coordination.

4.3.3 Utilized Federal Advisory Committee

ITS America, a utilized Federal Advisory Committee for the U.S. DOT, is proactivelyinvolved in ITS telecommunications matters and has formed a TelecommunicationsCommittee. The Committee, whose membership consists of representatives from governmentagencies, private sector stakeholders and academic organizations, develops positions andrecommendations pertaining to ITS telecommunications matters. The Committee monitorstechnology advancements in wireline and wireless telecommunications and addresses issuesassociated with optimizing telecommunications integration, including ITS telecommunicationssystem integration with other public and private systems. The Committee is examining howITS requirements could be coordinated with the National Information Infrastructure (NII).The ITS America Telecommunications Committee works proactively with the FCC and theNTIA on ITS RF spectrum matters such as spectrum management and electromagnetic

53


compatibility. The Committee addresses actions by the FCC and the NTIA which impactITS. The Committee is proactive in estimating telecommunications requirements, assessingRF spectrum needs, and planning for RF spectrum acquisition. As a result, the Committeeformulates and recommends positions to the ITS America Coordinating Council and facilitatesinformation transfer among stakeholders.

The ITS America Telecommunications Committee is establishing liaisons with U.S. andinternational organizations that can affect ITS telecommunications. Domestic organizationsinclude the Transportation Research Board, the American Automobile ManufacturersAssociation, IEEE, SAE, the Association of Public-Safety Communications Officials (APCO),and the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). TheCommittee is establishing liaisons with corresponding activities in Canada and Mexico tofoster ITS communications commonality throughout North America. The Committee is alsoestablishing liaisons with European and Japanese counterparts and with organizations withinthe ITU to maintain an awareness of international telecommunications developments.

Currently, the ITS America Telecommunications Committee is assessing RF spectrumresource requirements for ITS. Frequency and bandwidth requirements are mapped in amatrix with corresponding user services, ITS applications, communications functions, andsupporting technologies. The Committee is working in conjunction with the National ITSArchitecture Development Program to focus the contracted teams on spectrum issues, developRF spectrum requirements, and plan additional actions for Phase II of the architectureprogram. The RF spectrum requirements for the Automated Highway System (AHS) and .other ITS applications will be added to the matrix when they are identified. The Committee .is also developing a course of action to obtain the spectrum needed for ITS. The spectrumrequirements matrix is provided in Appendix D.

4.3.4 Public-Private Partnerships

Public-private partnerships can have significant benefits in ITS telecommunications systems.The government can be the catalyst and the facilitator to further encourage private sectorinvolvement in ITS. The capabilities of the private telecommunications infrastructure can beintegrated into the ITS telecommunications functions which could foster vendor competition,potentially improve performance, and lower overall costs. One option is a joint public-privatepartnership sharing of the telecommunications system development. If additionalinfrastructure were required, a private sector firm could install telecommunications cable and,in exchange for the use of right-of-way, provide the government agency with either reducedcost access to the system or a set number of fiber optic links for the agency’s exclusive use.Public-private partnership decisions and the role of private sector incentives need to be madewith full knowledge of the impact on ITS communications systems. The availability of right-of-way should be done through a formal solicitation process so that all private sectorproviders are given equal opportunity to participate.

54


4.4 ITS Telecommunications and the National Information Infrastructure

ITS and National Information Infrastructure (NII) planners can take advantage of theircommon telecommunications requirements. The ITS America Committees onTelecommunications and Standards and Protocols are coordinating ITS requirements with theNII. The NII, often referred to as the “Information Superhighway,” is currently undefined, butit is envisioned as a vast web of communications networks supporting wide and easy accessto information exchange and related applications. The NII architecture is being designed tomeet societal needs, support market-driven applications, provide maximum interoperabilityand interconnectivity, permit universal access, and provide user-friendly interfaces. The NIIwill provide many of the telecommunications functions necessary to support ITS. ITSapplications and the NII both require telecommunications links to deliver information to fixedand mobile users. Integrating ITS plans and requirements with NII development will benefitITS by increasing the compatibility and reducing the redundancy of telecommunicationssystems. ITS and NII planners should take advantage of the commonality by coordinatingtheir requirements such as the location of trunk lines in relation to highways and thecombined bandwidth needs. A thorough examination and usage of the NII infrastructure in acommunity will reduce costly duplication and unused capacity of existing NII assets.Dedicated ITS telecommunications systems may be needed in addition to the NII, because ofcertain ITS-specific applications, such as weigh-in-motion (WIM), electronic toll collection(ETC), and collision avoidance. The commonality between ITS and NII will be clarified in aU.S. DOT-sponsored study titled ITS Communications Alternatives Test and Evaluation. TheU.S. DOT, with support from ITS America and in conjunction with other U.S. government .agencies, will play an influential role in determining NII requirements and, as a result, willtake full advantage of the common requirements between ITS and the NII to ensurecompatibility and eliminate redundancy.

4.5 Telecommunications System Deployment Options

When deploying telecommunications systems for ITS, the deploying public or privateorganization generally has three options: 1) build and operate a dedicated ITS facility; 2)purchase services and facilities from private sector telecommunications providers; or 3) enterinto public/private partnerships with private sector telecommunication providers. Eachdeployment method has its own advantages and disadvantages. Dedicated systems canprovide known capacity, control, and potential long-term cost benefits. However, the risksassociated with such systems include high initial investment costs, potential for technologyobsolescence, difficulties with interfaces over separate jurisdictions, potential incompatibilitybetween geographic locations and between user services, and costs and complexities ofoperation and maintenance. A dedicated system might duplicate existing private sectorinfrastructure and therefore be an unnecessary expense of resources. It might also haveexcess capacity which could raise costs and may necessitate either adding other applicationsonto the system or selling the excess capacity. Selling excess capacity or offering additionalservices to subscribers of a government-owned dedicated communications system places thegovernment in competition with the private sector providers of telecommunications systems

55


and services. This is an issue of fair competition in the market place and what type of rolethe government should play.

Existing publicly-available, private sector telecommunications systems require less of aninitial investment, are continually upgraded with new technologies, and can providegeographic compatibility, user service compatibility, and ease of operation and maintenance.However, the risks associated with using the existing private sector-owned systems includelack of infrastructure availability and capacity along some highways, and high costs due toregulatory policies and lack of competition at the local level.

A third approach is a public/private partnership. Many partnership arrangements are possible.An example is one in which the public sector makes its right-of-way available to the privatesector through a formal solicitation process. In general, the public sector may require aspecific capacity, such as a specific number of fiber optic strands, be reserved for theirdedicated use. In return, the private sector participant would be able to lay land lines alongthe right-of-way and sell the remaining capacity to their customers. One benefit of this typeof arrangement is that telecommunications facilities would be located near the roadway,making it accessible for transportation data collection. In addition, maintenance arrangementscould be negotiated between the participants. The availability of right-of-way should be donethrough a formal solicitation process so that all private sector providers are given equalopportunity to participate.

The optimum deployment method will vary, depending on several factors such as the specificITS applications, the deployment region, solutions to institutional barriers, and changes inregulatory policies.

.

To determine the optimum deployment method, each procuring organization needs to performan accurate cost and capability assessment over the life of the telecommunications system,including both initial investment costs as well as on-going maintenance costs and scheduledupgrades. Analysis of the dedicated government-owned system must address the issuesassociated with excess capacity and duplication of private sector telecommunications systems.Analysis of the existing private sector-owned systems must address the leasing fees andcapacity availability. Analysis of a public/private partnership must address capacity,operations and maintenance costs, and the availability of right-of-way. In all approaches,liability issues should also be analyzed.

4.6 RF Spectrum Acquisition Strategy and Status

The overall telecommunications strategy of the ITS program is to make use of existingcommunications services such as cellular, personal communications services, and mobilesatellite, whenever possible and minimize the need for dedicated spectrum. Many ITS userservices can share spectrum with other applications. However, certain ITS applications, suchas emergency services, safety-related applications, and short range applications such as WIM,ETC, and collision avoidance, might require dedicated spectrum that must be “allocated” bythe FCC. “Allocation” is the process of designating RF bands for specific classes of use such

56


as Land Mobile, Broadcasting, Space, etc. Dedicated ITS RF spectrum can be acquired eitherthrough reallocation of existing spectrum or through new spectrum sharing arrangements. TheFCC and the NTIA have documented procedures for RF spectrum allocation, allotment, andassignment. The ITS America Telecommunications Committee tracks the technical andadministrative processes of reallocation and sharing arrangements so it can identifyopportunities to obtain needed ITS spectrum early in the process. ITS America will use theirRF spectrum requirements matrix, augmented by inputs from the architecture teams and ITSAmerica member organizations, to guide the acquisition process.

The status of the ITS frequency acquisition process is as follows:

- NTIA has allotted frequencies in the 220 MHz band (ten full-duplex channel pairs) on anexperimental basis to ITS. These frequencies are allocated nationwide and are beingcoordinated with Canada and Mexico to achieve Continental compatibility. Currently,these frequencies are assigned to field tests, but the process of releasing them for non-government operational use by ITS is in progress and will likely be complete in 1995.

. Discussions are progressing with NTIA to allocate the band from 5850 to 5925 MHz toITS as the primary service. The ITS America Telecommunications Committee will workwith the FCC so this band, when changed to a shared status, retains ITS as a primaryservice. Recent initiatives by the satellite services to use this band for a satellite uplinkwill probably mean that ITS will be co-primary with the Mobile Satellite Service.

- A comment was filed for the “Refarming” FCC Docket to allot some RF spectrum in the150 and 450 MHz bands to ITS to support interoperation with Public Safety agencies.

.

Currently, short-range telecommunications systems are operating at frequencies from 902-928MHz, however they might transition to 5850-5925 MHz when the cost of high frequencydevices decreases.

Accurate estimates of ITS RF spectrum requirements for each of the user services and aproactive approach to RF spectrum acquisition are in process. Forums such as theCommunications Alternatives Test and Evaluation Study, the National Architecture Program,and the ITS America Telecommunications Committee will provide analyses to determine theoverall ITS RF spectrum requirements and therefore determine the need for dedicated ITS RFspectrum.

ITS services that utilize dedicated RF spectrum will be of value to state and localgovernments as well as emergency service providers. These categories of users are exemptfrom RF spectrum competitive bidding. The extent, if any, to which dedicated RF spectrumwill be subject to licensing through competitive bidding, is a topic that needs to be addressed.

Dedicated RF spectrum for ITS applications will require administration and frequencycoordination services. Decisions need to be made regarding which organization shouldperform the frequency management functions for the dedicated RF spectrum.

57


5.0 CONCLUSION

The national ITS architecture and activities that coordinate ITS standards development andITS telecommunications systems will facilitate national compatibility. The national ITSarchitecture describes the governing plan and defines the relationships among systemcomponents. Standards help achieve national and global compatibility and can positivelyinfluence other product attributes such as performance, design, manufacturability, and cost. Acoordinated standards development process promotes timely identification and development ofneeded standards and eliminates redundant standards activities. Telecommunications systemsprovide information exchange for virtually all of the ITS user services. Many types oftelecommunications technologies are available, and they are continually evolving.Technology choices will have to be evaluated according to the specific application, such asfixed or mobile, one-way or two-way, and short range or wide area. The national ITSarchitecture and coordinated standards development and telecommunications systems arestrategic elements that can foster a nationally compatible ITS.

58

I - NATIONAL ITS PROGRAM PLAN CHAPTER V - USER SERVICES INTEGRATION

CHAPTER V - USER SERVICES INTEGRATION

1.0 INTRODUCTION

An understanding of the potential interactions, dependencies, and commonalities of ITS userservices contributes to the development of an efficient, integrated ITS. Many of the activitiesrequired to promote development of any given user service may be common to several or alluser services. Ultimately, ITS will impact the surface transportation system as a set ofintegrated transportation services which will improve efficiency and foster intermodaltransport. Planning ITS deployment presents a complex and unwieldy task if approached as29 separate endeavors. As discussed in Chapter IV, National Compatibility, the U.S. DOT isguiding the effort to define a consensus-based, national ITS architecture, which, whenadopted, will facilitate and foster the establishment of standards and pave the way for nationalcompatibility. While the architecture and standards efforts are underway, many members ofthe transportation community are seeking an understanding of the program’s interrelationships.The first portion of this chapter identifies the members of the transportation community andtheir areas of interest. Next, the chapter presents an analytically-based tool capable ofsupporting deployment planning for investment and deployment in the absence of a nationalITS architecture. This tool is the focal point of this chapter. It illustrates how the userservices could be integrated according to common functions resulting in cost savings,increased capabilities and compatibility. The chapter also includes an assessment of riskassociated with early deployments. This conceptual approach does not presume to prejudgethe national ITS architecture, rather it is offered as a planning tool to assist those who are .confronted with today’s challenges.

2.0 DEPLOYMENT PLANNING

Deployment planning is taking place all across the country as various organizations analyzetheir transportation needs and consider ITS as a solution. The absence of an ITS architectureand some standards creates a degree of uncertainty for those confronted with near-terminvestment and deployment decisions. Deployment planning involves a variety ofparticipants, non-technical and technical issues, and financial and time considerations. Thissection describes the various aspects of deployment planning in preparation for a discussion ofuser services integration.

2.1 Participants and Partnerships

Deployment planning will be accomplished by many different organizations and will requirenon-traditional cooperation among the participants. Public and private sector organizationswill pursue these planning efforts individually or in partnership.

Public Sector Participation Much of the transportation infrastructure base deployed at thistime is the responsibility of the public sector, namely state or local organizations. The federal

59


government does not deploy transportation infrastructure. It provides funding to the state andlocal governments to plan, develop, and deploy the transportation systems that they need.Public sector participation will be in the form of state and local departments of transportation,emergency services, police, utilities, transit agencies, and tourism. These public sectororganizations make deployment planning decisions in their communities. Public sectordeployments should satisfy the needs of their communities. Traditionally, public sectordeployments concern traffic control, emergency services, public transportation, and tollcollection.

Private Sector Participation A significant number of the deployment opportunities will bepursued primarily by the private sector. Some examples of these opportunities are in-vehicleproducts, information services, and fleet management services. Private sector participationwill be in the form of private industry, motor carriers, and transportation and informationservice providers. The private sector has, and will, invest in advanced technologydevelopment and adaptation to satisfy needs in all types of markets. These technologiesrepresent opportunities to develop systems that provide consumers with needed or desiredcapabilities. In some cases, technologies that were developed for the defense industry arebeing adapted to the transportation environment. Global Positioning System (GPS)applications have been in development for vehicle location and route guidance since the mid-1980s. GPS receivers are becoming smaller and easier to package. This investment by theprivate sector to develop better GPS receivers is driven by the potential revenue from the saleof these products. Fleet management is another application in which the private sector isdeploying systems that do not involve the public sector. Organizations that operate vehiclefleets recognize the benefits and efficiencies of ITS and are deploying them to gain acompetitive advantage in their markets. The telecommunications industry is providingwireline and wireless communications services and facilities, including fiber optic facilities, tomost of the country. These services and facilities will provide a communicationsinfrastructure to facilitate the deployment and delivery of ITS applications and services.

Public-Private Partnershius The public and private sectors will work together on many ITSdeployments. The relationship between these sectors will be defined differently in eachinstance, but it will involve a close working relationship between two or more parties. Anexample of a public-private partnership is the investment of the public sector in aninfrastructure deployment that could have potential benefits for the private sector. Bothpublic and private sectors could work together to plan and develop an optimal system meetingthe needs of the users and participants. Ideally, funding and time would be invested by allparticipants in an effort that would be mutually beneficial. Many of the operational tests willprovide insight to how public-private partnerships can work. One such project is the TravInfoproject in the San Francisco Bay Area. This project involves the development of a databaseof travel information that will be used by private sector developers to develop products for thegeneral public. The relationship between the public and private sector to develop such asystem requires that a public-private partnership be established. This partnership is a breakfrom traditional modes of operation. Public sector plans and information need to be shared

60


with the private sector to encourage the development of supporting technologies. The publicsector procurement, research and development, system planning, design, deployment, andoperations procedures may need to be reviewed or modified to facilitate certain aspects of thepublic/private sector relationship. Private sector capabilities and technology developmenthorizons need to be shared with the public sector in order for deployments to be planned andfunded, if necessary. This new relationship between the public and private sectors must bedeveloped on trust and commitment to the common goals of increasing transportation safety,advancing ITS, and improving the nation’s transportation system.

2.2 Decentralized Deployment Decisions

Deployment decisions will be made in a decentralized manner. State and local organizationswill be deploying ITS in their jurisdictions, and commercial organizations will be deployingin their market areas. The deployment decisions of these organizations will be independentand based on the unique financial, planning, and service requirements of each organization.The unique characteristics of each application provide a basis for evaluating and developingdeployment strategies and integrating user services. Private sector deployments are inherentlydecentralized due to their competitive nature.

2.3 Private Sector Business Strategies

Private sector organizations will make ITS investment decisions based on their estimates ofpotential return on investment and long term market growth. Inherent in these strategies isthe realization that there will be a need for research and development funding. Thus, thetempo of potential ITS deployments will be influenced by the resulting flow of newtechnology products and their adaptability to ITS applications.

.

The areas discussed in this section have illustrated the various influences on the deploymentplanning process. Each has an impact on the integration of an ITS. When planning is beingdone for a system that crosses more than one organization, opportunities exist to leveragecosts and assets to provide an optimal system. In some areas these are not common events.There are opportunities to share costs and assets of various organizations or participants in asystem development and there are also opportunities to capitalize on the interrelationshipsamong user services.

3.0 USER SERVICES INTEGRATION

ITS planning and deployments are proceeding, despite the absence of a national ITSarchitecture and the minimal availability of adopted standards. To assist a deployer inplanning for the adoption of a system approach, relationships among the user services wereanalyzed to define what integration options are available. This discussion of User ServicesIntegration is not to imply a system design but to point out how the user services could beintegrated. Tools will be presented as templates to be adapted to each deployment situation.

61


Planning organizations should be aware of the benefits of integrating the user services in asystem.

3.1 Functional Relationships Among User Services

Each of the 29 user services discussed in Chapter III was analyzed to identify candidateenabling technologies. This analysis is based on a wide range of technologies capable ofsupporting robust, fully functioned user service implementations. This does not imply that auser service deployment must necessarily include all of the enabling technologies or thefunctions they provide.

In order to keep the number of technologies at a manageable level, they were grouped intofunctional areas. In general, each functional area is comprised of one or more separatetechnologies which can be used interchangeably in a system deployment that provides a userservice. For example, two-way mobile communications could be provided by either digitalcellular telephones or two-way satellite communications. The functional areas are defined inTable 5-l.

Table 5-l Function Definitions

Function

TrafficSurveillance

Definition

Surveillance technologies that collect information about the status of the trafficstream. Possible technologies include loop detectors, infrared sensors, radarand microwave sensors, machine vision, aerial surveillance, closed circuittelevision, acoustic, in-pavement magnetic, and vehicle probes.

VehicleSurveillance

Surveillance technologies that collect a variety of information about specificvehicles. These technologies include weigh-in-motion devices, vehicleidentification, vehicle classification, and vehicle location.

Inter-AgencyCoordination

Technologies that connect travel-related facilities to other agencies such aspolice, emergency services providers, weather forecasters and observers, andamong Traffic Management Centers (TMC), transit operators, etc.

l-Way MobileCommunications

Any communication technology that transmits information to potentiallymobile reception sites but cannot receive information back from those sites.Possible technologies providing this function include Highway AdvisoryRadio, FM subcarrier, spread spectrum, microwave, infrared, commercialbroadcasts, and infrared or microwave beacons.

62



Function

2-Way MobileCommunications

Definition

Any communication technology that transmits information to potentiallymobile reception sites and allows receipt of information from those same sites.Possible technologies include cellular telephones, 2-way radio, spreadspectrum, microwave, infrared, and 2-way satellite.

Stationary Any communication technology that connects stationary sites. TechnologiesCommunications include fiber optics, microwave, radio, laud lines.

Individual Devices that provide information flow to a specific traveler. TechnologiesTraveler Interface meeting this function include touch screens, keypads, graphics displays and

computer voices at kiosks; keypads, computer voice, and on-board displaysystems in vehicles; personal communications devices carried with thetraveler; audiotex from any phone; and TV in the office or home.

Payment Systems Technologies that enable electronic fund transfer between the traveler and theservice provider. The technology areas include Automated VehicleIdentification (AVI), smart cards, and electronic funds management systems.This function overlaps with the Electronic Payment user service.

Variable Message Technologies that allow centrally controlled messages to be displayed orDisplays announced audibly to multiple users at a common location such as a roadside

display or display board in a transit terminal. These technologies wouldtypically be applied to provide information on highway conditions, trafficrestrictions, and transit status.

Signalized Traffic Technologies that allow for real-time control of traffic flow. PossibleControl technologies include optimized traffic signals, ramp metering, reversible lane

designation, and ramp/lane closures.

RestrictionsTraffic Control

Operational techniques that restrict the use of roadways according to regionalgoals. Techniques include HOV restrictions, parking restrictions, and road use(congestion) pricing.

Navigation Technologies that determine vehicle position in real time. Technologies thatprovide this function include GPS, LORAN, dead reckoning, localizedbeacons, map database matching, and cellular/radio triangulation.

DatabaseProcessing

Technologies that manipulate and configure or form at transportation-relateddata for sharing on various platforms. General purpose data base softwarecurrently exists and is currently being adapted to transportation needs such asdata fusion, maps, and travel services.

63



Function Definition

Traffic Prediction Data processing relating to prediction of future traffic situations. AlgorithmsData Pmcessing under development include areas such as real-time traffic prediction, and

traffic assignment.

Traffic ControlData Processing

Data processing related to the real-time control of traffic. Algorithms underdevelopment include optimal control and incident detection, and the interactionof route selection and traffic control.

Routing DataPmcessing

Data processing related to routing of vehicles including the generation of step-by-step driving instructions to a specified destination. Algorithms underdevelopment include the scheduling of drivers, vehicles, and cargo; routeselection; commercial vehicle scheduling, route guidance and multimodaldispatching.

In-VehicleSensors/Devices

Technologies providing a range of sensing functions to be located withinvehicles. Functions addressed by these technologies include monitoring ofvehicle performance and driver performance; determination of vehicle positionrelative to the roadway, other vehicles, and obstacles; improvement of visionin adverse conditions; and on-board security monitoring.

The user service bundles, introduced in Chapter III, are the starting point for determining theinterrelationship of one user service to another. The bundles provide logical groupings andcombinations of the user services. By analyzing a user service’s relationship to other userservices, a system may be conceived over a period of years in a comprehensive and deliberatemanner. This approach makes it possible to optimize the use of funds and resources resultingin a more achievable and affordable system deployment.

The results of the analysis of functional commonalities are depicted in Figure 5-2. In thefigure, the user service bundle is identified in the upper left hand corner of the chart. The leftside of the chart lists the associated functions. The right of the figure lists the user servicesin the bundle. If a function supports full implementation of a user service, the intersection ofthe user service row and function column is marked. Note that in some applications it is notnecessary to implement all supporting functions to successfully deploy a system providing auser service.

64


3.2 Using the Functional Relationships Tool

Based on the observations in the previous section and an understanding of the elements inTable 5-1, it is possible to use Figure 5-2 as a tool in decision-making. The followingparagraphs illustrate some examples for the use of this tool.

System Cost Options The most basic application of the information in Figure 5-2 is toanalyze options and potential investments. As noted previously, the figure cannot and shouldnot be used to select systems of lead services; that is the purview of a deployingorganization’s planning authorities. But once the selections have been made, Figure 5-2 canbe the basis for initial cost estimates of a desired service since the acquisition costs ofsystems providing the functions can be estimated.

For example, if a system providing Pre-Trip Travel Information were needed and a decisionwas made to explore the costs of such a system, options could be evaluated by selectingdifferent combinations ‘of the functions applicable to Pre-Trip Travel Information in Bundle 2.These different combinations will denote various levels of complexity and service potential.Costs could be accumulated from various providers to provide a rough order of magnitudeestimate of the system. Options could be evaluated and considered in the decision process.

Marginal Additional Investment Figure 5-2 can also be used to depict the nature of marginalinvestment required for deploying added functionality. It is important for managers to knowif an investment satisfies only a current need or if it lays the groundwork for potential futureimprovements or expansions. The tool; without specifying any system, demonstrates thatadded functions can prepare a community for delivery of new services. Selecting the systemto provide that function is a local choice based on numerous considerations.

For example, as shown in Figure 5-3, if investment funds are only available for thedeployment of a system that provides Route Guidance, it is evident that En-Route DriverInformation can be added with investment in two additional functions. Thus, an initialinvestment has provided one user service as well as the basis for a second user service withlimited subsequent costs. The solid circles in Figure 5-3 illustrate possible functions availablefrom a system with Route Guidance and the additional functions required to provide En-RouteDriver Information.

Costs Applied Across Multiple Services Public and private planners are interested not only innear-term decisions, but also in mid-to-long term perspectives. Costing all of the functions ina bundle might be very productive. If such an estimate shows that the benefits of thecommon element costs can be amortized across all the services, the organization’s leadershipmay be willing to commit to a significant investment. This is effective when the basic ormost common function among the user services being considered is applicable to all theservices. It should be noted that even though a function may be identified as common amongseveral user services, it is not always the same type of application for each user service. For

69


example, Database Processing will not necessarily be the same for Incident Management as itis for Route Guidance.

A commercial vehicle operator may investigate the possibility of using a single type of 2-WayMobile Communications in a system that would be delivering Commercial Vehicle ElectronicClearance, Automated Roadside Safety Inspection, On-Board Safety Monitoring, and FreightMobility. This communications system may be more expensive than a communicationssystem for just one user service, however, when its effect is considered collectively, it couldrepresent a significant savings in maintenance and operations.

Figure 5-3 Marginal Additional Investment Example

70


Private Sector Marketing Decisions Figure 5-2 can also assist private sector product andservice providers who market their systems to local government. Product and serviceproviders will react to infrastructure acquisition decisions made by governments. They willplan product development efforts to capitalize on known future system evolutions that providecertain functionalities. In some cases, a public-private partnership can be developed betweenthe local deployment authority and the private sector. Public sector infrastructure investmentsincrease in value when they are complemented by private sector products that deliver theinfrastructure data to the user. Giving the private sector insight into the public sector’splanning activities, will allow the private sector to make informed investment decisions tosupport public sector plans. This will bring the public sector investment benefit back to theconsumer. The public sector investments and planning will be made by the state and localdeployment organizations, and it is at this level that the public-private partnership should bedeveloped.

Cross-Bundle Assessments Close inspection of all the charts in Figure 5-2 reveals the amountof overlap in technology among user services in the bundles. In almost any decision scenario,the planner can perform a “cross-bundle assessment” of the potential for add-ons associatedwith a decision to implement systems of a priority service. For example, StationaryCommunications is a common function to all of the bundles and more specifically, 20 of the29 user services. The implementation of this function would have application not only tomany user services, but also to many deployment organizations. Public and privatedeployment organizations could arrive at a consensus on the trade-off between selecting anoptimum system to satisfy their needs or one that has the expandability and openness toaccommodate both existing and future needs.

In all applications of Figure 5-2 it must be understood that any individual systemimplementation will require specific technology selections. As planning progresses, decisionaids similar to Figure 5-2 will require periodic updating based on the specifics of the evolvingsystem.

4.0 FUNCTIONAL RISK ANALYSLS

Planners making near-term deployment decisions must be aware that the selection of anational ITS architecture and the setting of standards may exert significant impacts on theirdecisions. Each decision analysis should incorporate a thorough risk assessment if a decisionis made to proceed with a near-term deployment. This section offers a preliminary approachto such an assessment.

There are several ways to approach risk analysis. This risk analysis addresses the followingconsiderations:

71


. A selected system may be at risk with regard to national compatibility. Downstreamarchitecture decisions or standards selection may threaten the viability of the selectedsystem.

. A selected system may be compatible only in a narrow regional context. Thusimplementation or expansion of the system across regional boundaries may be at risk.

. A selected system may prove to be incompatible with other systems fielded after theselection of an architecture or the development of a relevant standard or protocol.

. A fourth consideration that will always be present is technological viability/maturity.Although this is an important consideration, the detail required to adequately discuss eachtechnology’s viability/maturity is beyond the scope of this chapter. The technologies areconsidered at the higher level of a function or system in this section.

Table 5-4 is a high-level risk analysis of system functions outside the framework of a nationalITS architecture and in advance of the establishment of standards relevant to these systems.The table illustrates that it is possible to make a rough order of magnitude estimate of afunction’s risk. The table can be used as a guide which can be tailored by deployersaccording to the unique features of their particular systems.

The definitions of levels of risk in terms of a system’s ability to operate over a sustainedperiod of time (system viability) are as follows:

. Low Risk - System viability will experience minimum impacts by architecture andstandards development.

. Moderate Risk - System viability is readily and affordably adaptable to architecture andstandards development. Some functions are conservatively identified as moderate becauseof cross region compatibility risks. Within their own operating areas, deployment risk islow.

. High Risk - System viability (in many cases across geographical and functionalboundaries) is potentially at risk by architecture and standards development.

72


Table 5-4 Risk Evaluation

Functions(See Table 5-1) Evaluation Data Risk

TrafficSurveillance

Traffic Surveillance technologies exist in many fonns today andare deployed. It is a regional compatibility issue. Risk existsacross regional boundaries. The use of existing, standards-compliant equipment reduces risk sensitivity,

ArchitectureLow

StandardsLow

VehicleSurveillance

Vehicle Surveillance technologies do not have a largedeployment base and the technologies are still being developed.It is primarily a regional compatibility issue but can have somenational and product level compatibility issues as well. Theneed for nationwide compatibility increases risk sensitivity.

ArchitectureHigh

StandardsMod

Inter-AgencyCoordination

Inter-Agency Coordination technologies are currently deployedand are not necessarily complex. It is a regional compatibilityissue. Risk exists across agency boundaries.

ArchitectureLow

StandardsMod

1 -Way Mobile 1 -Way Mobile Communications technologies are currently ArchitectureCommunications deployed. Examples are currently in use and applications are Low

being developed. It is a national and regional compatibility Standardsissue. Protocol compatibility increases standards sensitivity. Mod

2-Way Mobile 2-Way Mobile Communications technologies currently exist and ArchitectureCommunications ITS are being developed. Spectrum and protocol compatibility Low

issues exist on the national, regional, and product levels. StandardsProtocol compatibility increases standards sensitivity. Mod

Stationary Stationary Communications technologies are deployed and ArchitectureCommunications demonstrated to be effective. Existing infrastructure is available. Low

StandardsLow

IndividualTravelerInterface

Individual Traveler Interface technologies are being developedand a few have been deployed. Architecture and Standardssensitivity is dependent on data complexity and human factorsissues.

ArchitectureMod

StandardsMod

73



Functions(See Table 5-l)

PaymentSystems

VariableMessageDisplays

SignalizedTraffic Control

RestrictionsTraffic Control

Navigation

DatabaseProcessing

TrafficPrediction DataProcessing

Evaluation Data

Payment Systems technologies are in testing and the technologymaturity issues vary. It has compatibility issues on the national,regional and product levels.

Variable Message Display technologies are deployed and thetechnology is immature. No compatibility issues exist.

Signal Traffic Control technologies are deployed. There are anumber of configurations and algorithms. It has compatibilityissues on the cross-boundary regional level.

Restrictions Traffic Control policies are being employed and arelocally determined. Regional coordination is required.

Navigation technologies are beginning to be deployed andlocation technologies exist. Autonomous capabilities reducerisk sensitivity.

Database Processing technologies exist; immature adaptation totransportation needs. Database processing technologies are thebackbone of many user services. It has compatibility issues onthe national, regional, and product levels. Multiple databasestructures increase risk sensitivities.

Traffic Prediction Data Processing technologies are beingdeveloped. Technologies are immature due to algorithmevolution. It has compatibility issues on the regional level. Itis standards sensitive due to algorithm compatibility.

Risk

ArchitectureMod

StandardsHigh

ArchitectureMod

StandardsMod

ArchitectureLow

StandardsMod

ArchitectureMod

StandardsMod

ArchitectureLow

StandardsLow

ArchitectureMod

StandardsMod

ArchitectureLow

StandardsMod

74



Functions(See Table 5-l) Evaluation Data Risk

Traffic Control Traffic Control Data Processing technologies are deployed in ArchitectureData Processing small numbers. The basis of this technology lies in algorithm Mod

maturity. It has compatibility issues on the regional level. StandardsMod

Routing DataProcessing

Routing Data Processing technologies exist. The deploymentbase is still small and the lack of map database standards couldcause compatibility problems.

ArchitectureMod

StandardsLow

In-Vehicle In-Vehicle Sensor/Device technologies are in development and ArchitectureSensors/ Devices some have been deployed (vehicle performance monitoring). Mod

Overall, the technologies are immature. It has compatibility Standardsissues on the regional and product levels. Mod

4.1 Deployment Risk Assessment Example

Table 5-4 is, at best, one additional filter through which a deployment planner can refine adecision regarding early deployments. The table should be used as a template to conduct arisk assessment during the deployment planning process. All decision-makers should beaware of the potential risks involved with a planned deployment.

The following is an example of how risk assessment can be used in conjunction with thefunctional relationships identified in Figure 5-2. For this example, a decision has been madeto pursue a system deployment providing En-Route Driver Information. The functions thatare applicable to En-Route Driver Information in Bundle 1 of Figure 5-2 are evaluated fortheir levels of risk using Table 5-4. As Table 5-5 illustrates, there are no high risk functionsidentified for this application.

75


Table 5-5 Risk Assessment Example

Moderate Risk Functions Low Risk Functions

. Database Processing

. 2-Way Mobile Communications

. Individual Traveler Interface

. Inter-Agency Coordination

. Routing Database Processing

. Variable Message Displays

. l-Way Mobile Communications

. Traffic Prediction Database Processing

. Traffic Surveillance

. Navigation

. Stationary Communications

From this very rudimentary assessment, the planner can advise decision-makers with thefollowing strategic options:

. It is possible to invest in partial functionalities to support en-route driver information inthe present timeframe with very acceptable risk. This course of action would provide lessthan a fully functioned service but would pave the way for the complete servicesubsequent to the completion of the architecture and development of relevant standards.

. Transportation planners can develop a phasing strategy which minimizes risk and allowsfor near- to mid-term funding allocation in support of a coherent deployment plan.

. The decision-makers could opt to accept a moderate level of risk and plan now for near-term full function deployment as the technology becomes available.

5.0 CONCLUSION

The User Services Integration chapter describes some aspects of ITS which are generallyunderstood by many in the transportation community but are infrequently discussed in anintegrated narrative. The delivery of user services will be brought about by investments insystems. The systems will be fielded because they provide certain functionalities whichsatisfy requirements established in the markets and at the local government and private sector

76


levels where investments will be made. An assessment of the planning process reveals thefollowing insights:

. The user services will not be deployed or operated as 29 separate and independent entities.

. There are numerous ways of undertaking the analysis of the interactions among the userservices. There is no right or wrong way. Rationale should be identified.

. Functional commonalities exist between the user services and should be considered indeployment decisions. Systems which deliver user services will not just appear, they willbe selected, and the people making those technology choices will be motivated by certaininstitutional priorities. Efforts are underway to bring together organizations involved in anITS deployment. The creation of Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO) isimportant to address the needs of many stakeholders together and help solve these issueswith a coordinated solution. The MPOs are key to bringing ITS to areas wherejurisdictional boundaries often overlap or are vague. Ignoring organizational perspectivesmay lead to technically sound, but irrelevant conclusions. Thus, the bundles were formedfrom this dual view of what can influence system selection.

. Near-term investment planning in ITS is complicated by the absence of a national systemsarchitecture and the immature stage of standards development. These conditions introducerisk into potential acquisition decisions because compatibility is a key consideration forsuccessful implementation.

. Relationships between the user services and functions derived from an analytic base suchas Figure 5-2 can support the planning process and lead to a comprehensive assessment ofoutcomes related to acquisition choices. In the interim, until the selection of a nationalarchitecture and the setting of standards, deployment assessments will have to be temperedby an understanding of risk.

77

I - NATIONAL ITS PROGRAM PLAN CHAPTER VI - DEPLOYMENT

CHAPTER VI - DEPLOYMENT

1.0 INTRODUCTION

ITS deployment makes it possible for the users of the transportation system to realize thebenefits of ITS. It is a multi-phased process, that builds upon itself. ITS deployments havealready occurred in some areas of the country. Innovations will cause the evolution ofsystems already deployed and the implementation of systems in areas where ITS may nothave been applicable or possible in previous phases. The evolution of ITS deployment willdepend on institutional renovations, funding, on technology developments, and the will ofcommunities to apply new technology-based solutions to transportation problems.

At this time there is no definitive, centralized scheme to deploy ITS throughout the nation.State and local agencies and private sector organizations are making their individualdeployment plans and, in many cases, implementing them. ISTEA provides for the researchand testing of ITS technology but allows deployment to be shaped by market forces, makingit uncertain how ITS will evolve.

This chapter presents a vision of how ITS deployment could happen. This is not to implythat this vision is the only vision or that deployment will only happen as presented. Rather, itis presented to initiate an open discussion about deployment, public policies, institutional andtechnological issues, and the roles of the Federal, State, and local governments, and theprivate sector. These discussions will shape the deployment vision of the ITS community andidentify the changes required in public policies and the roles of the public and privateparticipants in ITS to attain that vision. The chapter begins with an assessment of currentdeployment in the public and private sectors with examples of deployed systems. Followingthe current deployment assessment is a vision of future deployment. This vision provides aplatform to analyze the effects of contrasting levels of public and private sector involvementand the outcome of each on selected issues concerning deployment. This analysis anddiscussion is presented to inform the public policy debate and private sector market policydiscussions that are taking place across America.

2.0 EXISTING ITS DEPLOYMENT

ITS involves the application of technology-based solutions to transportation problems. Manyof the technologies have been in existence for well over two decades. New communicationssystems and improved computing capacity have been used increasingly to address thetransportation problems that emerged in the 1980s.

Public sector deployments are addressing issues, such as

. Congestion and the limitations on expanding roadways to provide new capacity,

. The need to improve mass transit system management efficiency, and

79


. Cost reduction and convenience enhancement of toll systems.

The private sector has deployed systems that address, among others,

. The need to improve the management and operational efficiency of commercial fleets and

. The growing market demand for traveler safety, security, and information.

Current ITS deployment is illustrated in Figure 6-l. It points out the types of systems thathave been deployed in various parts of the country. Commercial vehicle operationsdeployment activities are shown in the top half of the figure. ITS deployment in the areas oftravel and transportation management, public transportation operations, electronic payment,emergency management, and advanced vehicle control and safety systems is shown in thelower half of the figure. The following paragraphs provide some detail of currently deployedITS.

Travel and Transportation Management Many metropolitan areas and State DOTS havedeployed, or are in the process of deploying, some form of centrally-controlled traffic signalsystem, freeway surveillance system and/or incident management program. These systems aremanaged actively through human intervention using signal timing, ramp metering, variablemessage signs and/or communication over highway advisory radios or commercial broadcastnetworks. Traffic surveillance technologies include loop detectors, video, and AutomatedVehicle Identification (AVI). Freeway service patrols are operated with both public andprivate sector participation in conjunction with some incident management programs.

Current information gathered by ITS AMERICA and U.S. DOT indicates that there areapproximately 12 freeway operation centers, 85 local traffic control centers, 31 freewayservice patrols, and 47 incident management programs. A recent survey of State trafficengineers carried out by ITE indicated that 38% of the respondents were actively involved inadvanced freeway traffic management system activities. Adaptive traffic control systemtechnologies are available at this time, however, operations and maintenance budgets andpublic sector skills level are restricting wide deployment. In addition, few of the systems thatare deployed are linked electronically to one another to share data. They operate, for themost part, independently.

Some private sector services, such as Metro Traffic and Shadow Traffic, use aircraft to gathertraffic information. Some freeway operation centers supply traffic information to these privatesector services where it is fused with other data and disseminated to the public. Thisinformation is provided to the user by radio or television broadcast or telephone services.Traffic information is also supplied from freeway and traffic management centers by variablemessage signs on freeways and arterial streets. Route guidance data is provided to the userthrough the use of in-vehicle systems and personal computer software packages. In-vehicleroute guidance is provided with static data at this time, since a lack of real-time

80


data and a lack of data consistency across regions restricts the development of dynamic routeguidance systems.

Public Transportation Operations Scheduling and run-cutting software are in use at mostmedium and large transit agencies. Computer aided dispatch transit radio systems andAutomated Vehicle Location (AVL) systems are becoming more common, since the numberof ancillary uses for the information is a growing incentive for agencies to acquire them.Fourteen transit properties currently have AVL capability. Location information is providedby Global Positioning System (GPS), signposts, or map-matching applications. Despite thelarge amount of transit data that is beginning to be collected, sharing of data between transitand traffic management systems is very low.

Demand responsive trip scheduling software is in widespread use on transportation systemsfor the elderly and disabled. Route deviation schemes exist on a few small systems. Anumber of high tech transit security devices have been in use for some time. These devicesinclude closed circuit TV cameras at major transit facilities (e.g., transit centers, park and ridelots, rail stations), slow scan, recording security cameras on-board transit vehicles andemergency alarm functions built into vehicle radio systems.

Electronic Payment Electronic toll collection systems are being deployed in various parts ofthe country. Approximately 20 automated electronic toll collection facilities are currentlydeployed. In some regions, efforts are underway to implement systems that cross state lines.Currently, the deployed electronic toll systems are not interoperable, however, standardsdevelopment is progressing to address this issue. Electronic fare collection systems that usemagnetic-stripe technology for collecting public transportation fares and parking fees havebeen deployed.

Commercial Vehicle Operations The Heavy Vehicle Electronic License Plate, Incorporated orHELP, Inc. and an operational test titled Advantage I-75 are furthering Commercial VehicleOperations (CVO) user services, especially electronic clearance. HELP, Inc. allows thoseparticipating, transponder-equipped heavy vehicles that are safe and legal to bypass weighstations and Ports-of-Entry at highway speeds. HELP, Inc. has operational sites in its memberStates. Advantage I-75 has three test sites nearing completion in Kentucky and Ohio alongthe Interstate 75 corridor.

Automated vehicle identification (AVI) and weigh-in-motion (WIM) technologies are beingapplied to gather information on credentials and vehicle weight. For routine roadside safetyinspections of a truck or bus, a number of states are using pen-based data input devices toreduce the total time for uploading the inspection data to existing state and national safetydatabases. A national carrier safety information system will link the existing Motor CarrierManagement Information System (MCMIS) to 100 roadside inspection sites electronically by1996. This will enhance the selection process of inspectors by identifying carriers with ahigh-risk safety record or those with no inspection history. This system will be expanded in

82


1997 to include driver and vehicle data at a total of 200 sites. These activities are madepossible by the cooperative partnerships that have been established between states and theCVO community.

Private truck and bus companies use technology to enhance safety and productivity. Carriersincorporate safety data, such as engine temperature and the number of hours a particulardriver has been on the road, into their routing and dispatching decisions from on-boarddevices. Several carriers are deploying GPS-based AVL systems to enhance their fleetmanagement capabilities. These systems often use existing communications systems,including satellite communications, for the transmission of data from the vehicle to the fleetmanagement center.

Emergency Management Approximately 24 emergency management systems are equippedwith AVL and 104 are planned to incorporate AVL into their management systems. Inaddition, the Enhanced 9-l-l deployment currently being undertaken provides for automaticphone number and location identification which can improve emergency vehicle assignmentand routing. The existing Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP) system routes 9-l-l calls tothe appropriate service provider in the proper location. These systems will put the requiredemergency services on the scene faster and more efficiently.

Advanced Vehicle Control and Safety Systems The VORAD system, a longitudinal andlateral collision warning system, has been deployed by Greyhound on a portion of its busfleet. This deployment is expected to reduce accident rates which will lower costs foroperating and maintaining the fleet. The driving public will also benefit from safercoexistence with buses on the road, and the bus passengers and driver will benefit from saferbus travel.

Specific examples of the current deployments described in the previous paragraphs are listedin Table 6-2. User services that are being provided by the deployment of these systems arealso listed in the table. Deployment today is taking place without requirements forcoordination or interoperability. Pockets of deployment are appearing due to theaggressiveness of some State and local governments who have identified needs andrecognized the benefits of applying ITS technology solutions to address their needs.

3.0 A DEPLOYMENT VISION

Given the breadth and variety of ITS, no picture of future deployment can be completelyaccurate or satisfactory to every stakeholder. Yet it is possible to present snapshots of whereITS deployment could be in 5 years, in 10 years, and beyond. This vision of a possible, evendesirable, deployment evolution can provide a focus for defining the issues, influences, andbarriers to deployment and the steps that can be taken to overcome them.

83


Table 6-2 Examples of Current ITS Deployments

System User Service(s) Provided Status

Transportation Management . Traffic Control . Islands of ATMS- Los Angeles A utomated Traffic . Incident Management deployment

Surveillance and Control . Limited deployment of- Seattle Freeway Management video cameras

System . Manual monitoring- Phoenix Freeway Management . Primarily public sector

System influence- Las Vegas A rea Computer

Traffic System

Travel Information . Pre-Trip Travel- MetroTraffic Information- ShadowTraffic . En-Route DriverIn-Vehicle Route Guidance Inform ation- Oldsmobile Guidestar . Route GuidancePC-based Software . Traveler Information- City Streets Services

- Radio and TV broadcasts inmost markets

. Limited deployment ofroute guidance

. Primarily private sectorInfluence

AVL/AVI- Various Transit Systems- Various Commercial Vehicle

Operators- Various Emergency

Management Services

- Public TransportationManagement

- Commercial FleetManagement

- Emergency VehicleManagement

. Limited AVL applications/scheduling software

. Limited AVI deployment

. Public and private sectorInfluence

Electronic Toll Collection- Illinois State Toll Highway

A uthority- Oklahoma PZKEPASS

. Electronic PaymentServices

. Limited/isolated deploymen

. Public and private sectorinfluence

Electronic Clearance- HELP, Inc.- A dvantage Z-75 (Operational

Test)

. Commercial VehicleElectronic Clearance

. Limited deployment

. Public and private sectorinfluence

Collision Avoidance Systems . Longitudinal Collision . Limited deployment. VORA D/ Greyhound Bus Lines Avoidance . Primarily private sector

. Lateral Collision influenceAvoidance

84


3.1 5-Year Vision

A vision illustrating ITS deployment in 5-years is provided in Figure 6-3. In this timeframe,a significant feature that emerges is the sharing of information among agencies and betweenthe public and private sectors. In the center of the figure, the traffic, freeway, transit, andemergency management systems are linked together to exchange information.

Transportation data is collected from various sources using several surveillance techniques bythe public sector and private service providers, is fused into a rich data base. This data isdisseminated by the private sector to the general public and other transportation organizations.The data is accessible on cable television, radio, telephone and on-line computer services inthe home, office, at interactive kiosks and in-vehicle. The National Information Infrastructure(NII) is evolving and is used to disseminate ITS data.

In this timeframe, the private sector recognizes that there are market opportunities to providetransportation information, therefore, it invests in product and service development. Thepublic sector receives traffic surveillance data either from investments in sensing infrastructureor from private sector services. Cellular phone and AVI deployments are extensive andexpanding providing a mobile communications system and data collection method for datareception and wireless traffic surveillance or probes. A key feature is that informationsystems are sharing data from multiple databases. Data items are being fused together toprovide more accurate and comprehensive transportation information.

Data sharing is accelerating within the CVO industry which is illustrated at the top of Figure6-3. State databases are linked together to exchange regulatory and safety information whichfurther automates the verification of credentials and vehicle safety monitoring. In addition,driver condition monitoring technologies are applied to improve fleet safety performance.AVI and WIM technologies are in operation on most major trucking corridors andinternational border crossings. AVL systems using GPS and satellite communications arebecoming common in truck and bus fleets which enhances the efficiency of freight,distribution, and fleet management systems.

Electronic toll collection systems are deployed at an accelerated pace due to user acceptanceand cost savings to toll authorities, the general public, and CVO. Various in-vehicle productsare offered by automobile manufacturers. Intelligent cruise control systems that enhancesafety by maintaining a steady distance between vehicles by adjusting throttle and brakingfunctions are deployed. Autonomous route guidance is readily available to the consumer.The increasing accessibility of traffic data allows dynamic route guidance to be deployed insome areas of the country. “Mayday,” or panic button security systems and services, aredeployed in many urban areas.

As the map of the United States in the lower right corner of Figure 6-3 illustrates, the 5-yeartimeframe deployments are regional or in pockets across the country despite the major

85


advances noted. (Note that the U.S. map is for illustrative purposes only and is not intendedto depict actual deployment areas.) Institutional coordination is increasing, and newpartnerships are forming between the public and private sectors. Arrangements are beingmade to exchange and sell public and private sector-collected data. The technologies areavailable to implement congestion pricing in some areas, however some institutional issuesremain and must be addressed. Toll collection and traffic management begin to shareinformation and comprehensive travel information increases the mode choices available to thetraveler.

3.2 10-Year Vision

A vision of ITS deployment in 10 years is presented in Figure 6-4. Data sharing is widespread and is integrated among the transportation agencies and services which provideintermodal coordination for passenger and freight movement. Public and private sectororganizations have cooperative agreements regarding the collection and selling oftransportation data. An ideal situation may be that the public sector collects transportationdata from its surveillance and management infrastructure and the private sector disseminatesthat information to the users through its communications products and services. Thisrelationship exploits the strengths of each sector to provide the user with the best informationpossible. The data that is collected and fused together forms rich databases of transportationinformation which provide the basis for sophisticated traffic management systems. Adaptivetraffic control is possible over a larger area. Mode choice options are readily available to theuser which facilitates congestion pricing. Communications, navigation, and electronicpayment systems are combined into single in-vehicle systems which increase the availabilityof integrated transportation data and services to the user. Universal electronic payment cards,or “smart cards,” are used for toll, transit fare, parking, and non-transportation financialtransactions. In-vehicle ITS applications are standard items on most vehicle models.

Electronic clearance is operational nationwide and on international trucking corridors. Anintegrated network and database of electronic clearance and safety information providesuniformity to the CVO community both nationally and internationally. Automated vehicleand driver safety monitoring is implemented on all commercial vehicles. Fleet and freightmanagement systems exchange data which increases the efficiency of intermodal distributionoperations. Integration and efficiency issues have caused regulatory reform. Cooperativepartnerships exist between all States and the CVO community facilitating effective changesfrom traditional practices.

Enhanced vehicle control systems are marketed for most vehicles. The evolution ofintelligent cruise control expands to lateral warning and control systems that provide collisionavoidance features. Deployment of vehicle-to-vehicle communications systems makesintersection collision avoidance systems possible.

87


In-vehicle route guidance, CVO applications, and information systems are being deployeduniformly across the country. However, traffic surveillance and control systems are deployedwith regional emphasis. The integration of transportation data continues to grow and involvemore neighboring agencies and private sector organizations. As data integration increases, theregional effectivity of these systems will evolve into national coverage. The emergence ofenhanced vehicle control systems sets in place basic systems required for the AutomatedHighway System (AHS).

3.3 20-Year and Beyond Deployment Vision

The deployment vision beyond the 20-year timeframe involves the evolution of transportationdata collection, dissemination, and traffic management. National coverage of most systems ispossible. The major change during this timeframe is the deployment of AHS. The evolutionof ITS through the 5- and lo-year timeframes lays the groundwork for AHS. Data collection,sharing, and dissemination systems and enhanced vehicle control systems are the basicelements of AHS. The way in which these systems develop and the acceptance they gainfrom the users shapes AHS evolution. AHS is not the end state of ITS; it is a part of ITSalong with all of the systems that are deployed before it. Similar to previous systemdeployments, AHS is deployed initially on a regional basis in areas where it is most effective.Overall, ITS is deployed in an evolutionary process. Each deployment builds on thedeployments that have preceded it.

4.0 CHARACTERIZATION OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE INVOLVEMENT

The deployment vision illustrated in the preceding paragraphs could be achieved in severalways, one of them being different levels of involvement by the public and private sectors.Many issues will affect ITS deployment, including, public and market policies, technologydevelopments, and institutional concerns. The manner in which these issues are resolved orshaped will directly impact how quickly ITS benefits can be realized through systemdeployments and how extensive deployment will be across the nation. The key participantsinvolved in ITS are the public and private sectors. They significantly influence the resolutionof issues, the formation of policy, and the generation and expenditure of funding. In thefollowing paragraphs, the public and private sector participants in ITS will be characterized toframe an analysis of how these participants can affect particular issues of ITS deployment.

4.1 Public Sector

The public sector is represented by the Federal, State, and local governments. The Federalgovernment provides guidelines, policies, and funding to the State and local governments forthe construction and maintenance of transportation facilities including ITS. It is responsiblefor the national ITS perspective and for encouraging compatible system development. Thetools available for the Federal government to make this happen are funding, policy generation,and legislation.

89


The State and local governments are responsible for the construction, operation, andmaintenance of the transportation systems in their jurisdictions. They receive substantialfunding from the Federal government to supplement State and local resources and arerequired, in some cases, to follow applicable Federal policies and guidelines. However, theirprincipal concern is meeting the needs of their own jurisdictions. In terms of ITS, State andlocal governments are responsible for the deployment of public sector infrastructure in theirareas.

The public sector level of involvement in ITS can be characterized by a continuum with twoextremes being assertive and non-assertive. In order to simplify the following discussion, theFederal government portion of the public sector and the State and local government portion ofthe public sector will be discussed as separate entities. The Federal government provides animportant variable. The actions of the Federal government, such as regular funding, fundingincentives, regulatory initiatives, or other measures will have a direct impact on how the Stateand local governments approach ITS deployment. The State and local governments can eachimpact ITS deployment by their actions regarding the application of regular federal funding toITS deployment projects, the generation of State and local funding for ITS deployments, andthe coordination of deployments with neighboring jurisdictions. It is important to note thateach State and local government has different operating environments, such as rural, urban,population density, geographic location and climate to name a few. They also differ in theirITS involvement and interest. For these reasons it is necessary, in some cases, to generalizetheir characteristics for this discussion. The following paragraphs describe how the extremesof public sector involvement can affect ITS deployment.

Involvement of the Federal government in ITS today can be characterized as non-assertivedue to its limited amount of influence upon how the State and local governments spend theirFederal dollars with regard to ITS. The Federal government primarily provides funding to theState and local governments for ITS research, operational testing, and planning programs.The Federal government encourages the use of ITS applications but does not require or fundITS deployment directly. Decisions about whether to invest in ITS and which user servicesshould be provided are left to the State and local planning processes. Some State and localgovernments are very assertive and are pursuing ITS vigorously. They have implementedstudies and planning efforts that will make ITS a reality in their jurisdictions. Other State andlocal governments are not interested in ITS and do not see the need for it in theircommunities.

In an assertive public sector role, the Federal government could take a leadership role in thedevelopment of ITS on a national basis. In addition to encouraging compliance with thenational ITS architecture, it could develop a definitive strategy to facilitate and provideincentives for the nationwide deployment of ITS. Federal-aid incentives could be used toencourage compliance with such a strategy and with the architecture. This would encouragethe deployment of nationally compatible systems. At the present time, ISTEA does notrequire this type of involvement by the Federal government. At the State and local levels, an

90


increased public sector role would imply that all States and local governments would beactively pursuing ITS applications where it was appropriate. The use of certain Federalfunding mechanisms, such as incentives, would accelerate ITS deployment in some State andlocal areas. It is important to remember that the capacity of the State and local governmentsto deploy ITS is not just a matter of funding and policy, but includes skills availability andtraining, involvement of the academic community in research, and institutional capacity. If allState and local governments were to become active in ITS on their own, a nationallycompatible system would require cooperation at the State and local levels and adherence tostandards and the architecture. The Federal government is an effective variable in the publicsector in establishing a nationally compatible system. Its level of involvement will affect howITS is developed and deployed throughout the country.

4.2 Private Sector

The private sector in ITS consists of product and service providers, and private industries,such as CVO, that use ITS as a tool to increase the efficiency of their operations. Becausethe private sector is diverse and pursues many different opportunities, they move at differentpaces to develop their products and services. As a whole, the private sector is guidedprimarily by market forces. Product and service providers develop and sell their offerings tosatisfy the demand of the market. Other parts of the private sector can respond to their non-ITS markets by providing their products and services at a lower cost due to efficienciesgained through ITS applications.

Similar to the public sector case, the private sector level of involvement in ITS can becharacterized as a continuum with two extremes: reactive and proactive. The underlyingmotivation for the private sector change from a reactive role to a proactive role is increasedconfidence in the market potential of ITS. The following paragraphs describe how the privatesector’s level of involvement can affect ITS deployment.

The private sector’s involvement in ITS today is one of exploration and understanding of themarket. While there are some companies that are aggressively pursuing ITS productdevelopment, many companies are skeptical about the actual market potential of ITS. Thisskepticism provides the major variable component for the private sector characterization. Ifthe private sector is skeptical about the market, it will not take substantial risks or make largeinvestments in product and service development. It is reactive or responsive to marketdemands and opportunities as they appear but does not lead the market with investment. Ifthe government provides funding to an ITS project, the government has essentially modifiedthe existing market, and the private sector will respond to the new market accordingly.

At the other end of the spectrum, if the private sector is proactive because it believes in thelarge potential and opportunity of ITS, it will invest heavily in the development of ITSproducts and services. It will develop the market rather than waiting for the market todevelop on its own. The private sector is more likely to take substantial risks based on the

91


belief that the market is solid and has enormous potential for return on investment. It looksfor opportunities to offer traditionally public sector services, such as electronic toll collectionand traffic surveillance, through privatization.

4.3 Involvement Schemes

The varying levels of involvement of the public and private sectors are shown graphically inFigure 6-5. The public sector involvement level is shown on the vertical axis and the privatesector involvement level is shown on the horizontal axis. This figure can be used to discussthe varying degrees of involvement of the two sectors and to speculate on the outcome ofcertain ITS issues. The quadrants formed by the axes represent involvement schemes, andthey are numbered 1 through 4. These schemes will be used to analyze how ITS issues canbe affected by differing involvement from the public and private sector participants. Theyhave been presented in this manner to frame or bound a discussion or debate. In reality, theinvolvement of the public and private sectors in ITS will be somewhere on the continuumbetween the extremes. A single involvement scheme, such as an assertive public sector andproactive private sector, will not satisfy all issues. Since ITS involves so many differentinterests and participants, cooperation and compromise is the successful approach for movingforward.

5.0 ITS ISSUES

This section assumes an objective of achieving the evolutionary deployment vision set forth inSection 3.0 and projects the outcomes of each involvement scheme of public and privatesectors for certain important issues. This section is intended to promote discussion on themost appropriate path to take. Some issues may be resolved better with a more assertivepublic sector, while others should be left to be resolved with the existing market forces. Mostlikely, a single involvement scheme will be unable to address all ITS issues in an optimalmanner.

The following paragraphs identify selected ITS issues. This is a representative sample and isnot intended to be a complete list of issues. Each issue is analyzed with respect to theimpacts of the four involvement schemes. In this way, the influence of each involvementscheme on each issue can be described.

5.1 Issue: Sources of Funding - Operation and Maintenance Funding

Federal funding supplements State and local resources that are used to operate and maintaintraditional transportation systems. Many State and local governments do not have the skills,training equipment, or funding to operate and maintain ITS in their current organizations.Providing the skill and equipment resources for ITS requires additional training and funding.This issue is analyzed below for each involvement scheme.

92


1. Reactive Private/Non-Assertive Public - State and local operations and maintenanceresources would be limited. Funding proposals would compete with other, traditionaltransportation demands in the regular Federal-Aid process. State and local ITSdeployments would be low, reducing the demand on operation and maintenance resources.

2. Reactive Private/Assertive Public - Federal funding incentives would make moreoperations and maintenance resources possible at the State and local levels. This fundingsource would minimize competition with other, traditional transportation demands. Publicsector ITS deployments would be high, increasing the demand on operation andmaintenance resources.

3. Proactive Private/Non-Assertive Public - State and local operations and maintenancefunding would be restrictive to ITS deployment. Privatization of traditionally publicsector systems would be increased with a proactive private sector. Private sector fundingwould cover system operation and maintenance for those privatized systems. State andlocal ITS deployments would be low, reducing the demand on operation and maintenanceresources at those levels.

4. Proactive Private/Assertive Public - Operations and maintenance resources would beavailable from Federal incentive funding, State and local funding, and private sectorsources. This would minimize competition with other traditional transportation demands.State and local ITS deployments would be high, increasing the demand on operations andmaintenance resources. Through public/private partnerships, privatization, and State andlocal government commitment, these demands can be met.

A more assertive public sector role would provide more Federal funding to the State and localgovernments to operate and maintain ITS, but possibly at the expense of other traditionaltransportation funding sources if the budgets remain consistent with today’s. A proactiveprivate sector can help offset some of the operations and maintenance costs through theprivatization of public systems. The optimal approach for this issue is within involvementscheme 4 where there is strong support from the public sector in terms of Federal fundingincentives and State and local ITS support. In addition, where there are areas that do nothave State and local support, the private sector could provide operations and maintenancecapabilities through privatization.

5.2 Issue: Extent of Deployment

The extent to which ITS is deployed, both in the types and numbers of systems deployedacross the country, will be greatly influenced by the degree of involvement by the public andprivate sectors. Each sector will influence different areas of deployment, such as trafficmanagement systems, traveler information systems, Commercial Vehicle Operations (CVO),or Emergency Management Systems (EMS). This issue is analyzed below for eachinvolvement scheme.

94


1. Reactive Private/Non-Assertive Public - Deployment would be regional and uncoordinated.Pockets of deployment would center around the most active State and local governments.The Federal government would encourage State and local governments to comply with thenational ITS architecture but would have no compliance mechanism. Deployment ofinfrastructure systems would be very slow. Some State and local governments would bedeploying, however compliance with the national ITS architecture would not be consistent.Private sector deployments would be slow where significant infrastructure is required.The lack of a uniform ITS infrastructure would impede the development of infrastructure-dependent products and services. Market forces would determine what products andservices sell in each region. National compatibility would be minimal.

2. Reactive Private/Assertive Public - State and local infrastructure deployment would besomewhat balanced and nationally uniform for incident management, traveler information,traffic control, public transportation, and emergency services. State CVO databases wouldbe linked to share data. Public transit and multimodal options would be emphasized.Demand management would be possible. Federal funding incentives would be targeted forITS deployment. These incentives would be tied to compliance with the national ITSarchitecture. The Federal government would facilitate the adoption of standards. Privatesector markets would be expanded by the increase in infrastructure system deploymentscausing the private sector to react with more product development.

3. Proactive Private/Non-Assertive Public - In-vehicle and infrastructure-independent systemswould be extensively deployed. Privatization would be common. The CVO communitywould be well-equipped and compatible with participating States. Strong advertising andmarket development would expand the private sector market. The private sector wouldfacilitate industry standards development. State and local systems would purchasetransportation data from the private sector. Transportation management, including publictransportation, would not be extensively deployed.

4. Proactive Private/Assertive Public - Deployment would be rapid and robust withcompatibility and architecture compliance. Standards development and adoption would beaccelerated. State and local systems would collect traffic data, and the private sectorwould disseminate it. Services are functional and deployed in most parts of the country.Federal funding incentives would augment State and local funds for infrastructuredeployments. Large investments are made by the private and public sectors.

A proactive private sector and assertive public sector approach, scheme 4, would result inuniform and extensive ITS deployment, but at the highest cost. The outcome desired fromthis issue requires that a decision be made concerning the available amount of money and thebase of deployment that is needed. Assertive State and local governments could provide moreextensive transportation data collection, while a proactive private sector could produceextensive data dissemination capabilities.

95


5.3 Issue: Achievement of Public Goals

The achievement of public goals (e.g., improving safety, system efficiency, intermodalconnectivity, and achieving national uniformity) is influenced mostly by the level ofinvolvement by the public sector. National goals are influenced by the Federal governmentand regional goals are influenced by the State and local governments. The achievement ofpublic goals impacts the support of the general public for the ITS program. This issue isanalyzed below for each involvement scheme.

1. Reactive Private/Non-Assertive Public - Emphasis on public transportation and intermodalconnections would not be realized. Only a limited number of areas would achievesufficiently broad deployment to fulfill significant public goals. Rural services would bevery slow to develop. The attainment of regional and local goals through ITS deploymentwould be realized only in assertive State and local areas. The Federal government wouldencourage the deployment of ITS to attain national goals and funding would come fromRegular Federal-Aid. The private sector would only address the attainment of publicgoals where it involved the market opportunity, such as the individual traveler.

2. Reactive Private/Assertive Public - State and local deployment would be driven by theneed to meet public goals. Since the private sector addresses the individual traveler andconsumer, those users may not be addressed in an effective manner due to delayedresponse of the private sector. National goals achievement would be assisted through theimplementation of Federal funding incentives. Public transportation, intermodalconnections, public safety, and rural services would be addressed by the State and localgovernments.

3. Proactive Private/Non-Assertive Public - Some national goals would be achieved if theyalign with individual traveler and consumer needs. The private sector would aggressivelypursue the individual traveler and consumer needs and goals due to the marketopportunities. Where privatization of public services was available, those areas wouldrealize increased public goals attainment in public transit and safety. Publictransportation, intermodal connections, public safety, and rural services may not havesufficient markets to develop public goals adequately. The attainment of regional goalswould be limited to the more assertive State and local areas.

4. Proactive Private/Assertive Public - A robust market would promote maximumdeployment which would focus on public goals. National and regional goals would beachieved through Federal funding incentives and assertive deployment pursuits by theState and local governments. The recognition and attention to market opportunities by theprivate sector would also support the achievement of national and regional goals.

National and regional public goals will be achieved more quickly with increased involvementby the public sector. Involvement schemes 2 or 4 will address this issue most favorably. The

96


State and local governments will have the largest impact on public goals since they will bethe primary deployers of ITS. National goals achievement would be assisted through theimplementation of Federal funding incentives. Public transportation, intermodal connections,public safety, and rural services would be addressed by the public sector. The impacts of theprivate sector will be most noticed in the areas of individual traveler and consumer products.They will address the public goals of safety and efficiency.

5.4 Issue: Market Stimulation

Stimulation of a strong domestic ITS industry that is able to compete effectively in a globalmarketplace can be influenced by different levels of public and private involvement. Thepublic sector can modify the market with funding and deployment, while the private sectorcan accelerate the market through investment and development.

1. Reactive Private/Non-Assertive Public - National market stimulation would be slow.Regional infrastructure and in-vehicle systems markets would be proportional to theinvolvement of the State and local governments in ITS and the needs of the communities.The private sector would respond to market demands. Electronic payment and CVOwould develop competitive markets. The U.S. ITS industry would be slow to address theglobal market.

2. Reactive Private/Assertive Public - National market stimulation would be high for publicsector systems such as traffic management and public transit, and emergency management.State and local infrastructure would modify the market and attract the private sector.Private sector products and services would increase following public sector stimulation.The U.S. ITS industry would address infrastructure systems in the global market.

3. Proactive Private/Non-Assertive Public - National market stimulation would be high forin-vehicle and infrastructure-independent products and services. Existing infrastructuresystems, such as cellular, would exploit the ITS market. State and local systems would beovershadowed by the surveillance capabilities implemented by the private sector. Thepublic sector would expand the private sector market opportunities by purchasingtransportation information from private sector providers. There would be a broad range ofinternationally competitive in-vehicle and infrastructure-independent products and services.

4. Proactive Private/Assertive Public - National market stimulation would be high in all areasof ITS. State and local infrastructure systems would be nationally compatible and uniformin distribution. Private sector products and services would be robust and ultimatelydepend on the consumer’s view of value for the price. There would be a broad range ofinternationally competitive products and services.

Involvement schemes 2, 3, and 4 provide increased market stimulation. Increased Federalfunding can increase the deployment of infrastructure systems by State and local governments.

97


These deployments modify the market to promote additional private sector development forinfrastructure-dependent products and services. In schemes 3 and 4 the private sector investsheavily to develop the markets for its products and services. Public sector funding could beused to begin infrastructure deployments. As these systems become established across thecountry, the private sector will become more involved with products and services to deliverinformation and capabilities to the user. The global market is addressed uniformly in scheme3 and 4 since competition for in-vehicle systems in the global arena requires a very strongprivate sector involvement.

5.5 Issue: Interagency Cooperation

Strong alliances must be built to share travel information, coordinate activities, and involvethe private sector in developing effective, innovative information distribution outlets. Thisissue is analyzed below for each involvement scheme.

1. Reactive Private/Non-Assertive Public - Interagency cooperation exists only in State andlocal communities that are active in ITS. Deployment in this situation is mostly regionaland not interoperable. There are no incentives to cooperate.

2. Reactive Private/Assertive Public - Interagency cooperation is high on State and localgovernment systems. The Federal government would provide funding incentives topromote interagency cooperation. The private sector cooperates in a supporting role.State and local agencies would form alliances to share data and provide complementaryservices.

3. Proactive Private/Non-Assertive Public - Interagency cooperation may be stimulated by theprivate sector on a regional basis. Increased activity and privatization would force theprivate sector to seek cooperative arrangements with some State and local agencies.

4. Proactive Private/Assertive Public - Interagency cooperation would be stimulated by bothsectors. This would facilitate the deployment of richer databases and more accurate andtimely data for travelers and emergency services.

Interagency cooperation is mainly affected by State and local government involvement.Participation by State and local agencies in either involvement schemes 2 or 4 would facilitateoptimal cooperation. State and local priorities could be placed on coordination activities.

5.6 Issue: Privacy

This issue focuses on how policy concerning privacy is developed. Privacy concerns couldslow deployment significantly due to lack of consumer confidence, acceptance, andparticipation. Privacy issues could hinder development of many systems such as traffic

98


surveillance using probes and AVI. This issue is analyzed below for each involvementscheme.

1. Reactive Private/Non-Assertive Public - Privacy concerns would be raised primarily at theState and local levels. These concerns would focus on the retention of data by the publicagencies. A voluntary privacy policy would be adopted within the private sector.

2. Reactive Private/Assertive Public - Privacy concerns would emerge at the local, State andnational levels. These concerns would focus on public collection and retention of personaldata. National privacy and data security policies would be adopted.

3. Proactive Private/Non-Assertive Public - Significant privacy concerns would be raisedabout private sector use and resale of personal data. These issues would slow useracceptance of certain systems. Private sector companies would be innovative in securingdata and develop internal enforcement mechanisms, however this would have minimalimpact overall.

4. Proactive Private/Assertive Public - National ITS policy and data security policycompliance would be required as condition of some Federal funding. State and localgovernments would levy national and regional privacy and data security policyrequirements on public sector procured systems. The private sector would comply withnational policy and establish internal enforcement mechanisms.

This issue surfaces the general public’s concern of personal data retention in computerdatabases. The general public has historically trusted Federal, State, and local privacyguidelines more than those of the private sector. They do not see the private sector as beingable to accomplish privacy policy on its own. The privacy issue is also very important to thecommercial operator who must protect competitive information. Involvement schemes 2 or 4will provide the general public with the most acceptable range of participation by the publicand private sectors.

5.7 Issue: Deployment Cost

The source of deployment funding will vary according to the public and private sector levelsof involvement and will affect how deployment costs will be distributed. This issue isanalyzed below for each involvement scheme.

1. Reactive Private/Non-Assertive Public - Deployment costs would come from limitedFederal-aid sources. State and local agencies would be forced to deploy with the fundsthat are used to construct and maintain their entire transportation system. The privatesector would only deploy in areas for which there is low risk and substantial return oninvestment. Consumer products may not be affordable for everyone.

99


2. Reactive Private/Assertive Public - Federal funding incentives could be available for thosecommunities wishing to deploy ITS. Increased funding with minimal direction to theState and local governments maximizes the flexibility that the States and locals have toimplement ITS. The private sector would address the increased activity in the publicsector market, but some consumer products and services may not be affordable foreveryone.

3. Proactive Private/Non-Assertive Public - State and local deployments are funded throughregular Federal-aid sources. The private sector would invest heavily in ITS and, throughprivatization and data collection alternatives, it would provide some public sector systems.Consumer products and services profits would be reinvested in improvements andenhancements.

4. Proactive Private/Assertive Public - State and local deployment costs would come fromFederal, State and local sources. Federal funding incentives could be available for thecommunities that want to deploy ITS. The private sector would invest heavily in ITS andenter into cost-sharing agreements with State and local governments.

Involvement scheme 3 provides the least financial burden for Federal, State, and localfunding. Private sector investment is recovered through the sale of products and services inthe market place. Deployment costs are distributed equitably among those who purchaseproducts and services.

5.8 Issue: Relationship of ITS to Other/Non-Transportation Services

ITS will make non-transportation services such as health care, education, and recreationreadily available to users. ITS also has a relationship to other services as an outlet fortransportation information. For example, the existing communications infrastructure providescommunications capabilities to the transportation system. This issue is analyzed below foreach involvement scheme.

1. Reactive Private/Non-Assertive Public - Other services do not see the potential in ITS and,at most, would see it as a small subset of their market.

2. Reactive Private/Assertive Public - State and local governments would look for ways toexploit existing infrastructure to lower costs of ITS deployment. Where outlets are notavailable, the public sector would invest in their development. The private sector wouldrespond to public sector investment.

3. Proactive Private/Non-Assertive Public - Private sector industries, such ascommunications, would see the opportunities in ITS and begin working closely with Stateand local agencies for ways to expand the communications infrastructure to best suit ITSneeds and the needs of other markets. This would result in the expansion of both markets.

100


4. Proactive Private/Assertive Public - State and local government and the private sectorwould work closely to apply existing infrastructure in non-transportation services to ITS.This would result in the expansion of both markets.

Involvement scheme 3 would provide the most efficient use of existing infrastructure to ITSthrough a proactive private sector. This would catalyze the expansion of both ITS and thenon-transportation market.

5.9 Issue: Effect on State and Local Choice

State and local governments bear the responsibility to the general public to meet localtransportation needs. Flexibility and control in meeting those needs with ITS deployment ishighest when they are provided adequate funding and not limited by Federal restrictions. Thisissue is analyzed below for each involvement scheme.

1. Reactive Private/Non-Assertive Public - The use of regular Federal-Aid funds provides theState and local governments with flexibility.

2. Reactive Private/Assertive Public - The Federal government could offer Federal fundingincentives to State and local governments. The influence this has on State and localchoice depends on the extent of restrictions placed on the incentives and the extent towhich they can fund deployment with State and local funds. If restrictions are few andfunding availability is high, State and local choice is maximized.

3. Proactive Private/Non-Assertive Public - Private sector deployment relieves some of theburden on State and local agencies for deployment costs. The State and localgovernments preserve their choice in the use of regular Federal-Aid funds. However,State and local agencies may have little leverage over privately-operated systems. Theproactive private sector maximizes the choices available to the State and localgovernments.

4. Proactive Private/Assertive Public - Federal funding incentives could restrict State andlocal decisions. Privatization may narrow the public sector influence.

State and local choice is maximized in involvement schemes 1 and 3. Scheme 3 actuallyprovides more choices since the private sector is producing more products and services tochoose from, and alliances between the public and private sectors can be formed to sharecosts. Assertive State and local governments who decrease their reliance on Federal fundsand increase the generation of State and local funds along with private sector partnerships willhave the maximum flexibility possible.

101


6.0 CONCLUSION

There are both favorable and unfavorable outcomes when the various involvement schemesare applied to the issues in section 5. For example, the extent of deployment could bepositively affected by the increased involvement of both the public and private sectors. Aproactive private sector could stimulate a national market for in-vehicle and infrastructure-independent products and services, while State and local infrastructure systems, such astransportation management and public transportation management, benefit from an assertivepublic sector. State and local choice is maximized by increased Federal funds and decreasedFederal requirements. The vertical and horizontal axes in Figure 6-5 represent an continuumof involvement for the public and private sectors. While the endpoints represent the extremesfor each sector’s involvement, there are many intermediate levels that are more realistic. Theactual roles will be less clearly-defined than the extremes and will represent a consensusapproach for ITS. From the previous discussion of the roles and issues, no singleinvolvement scheme emerged to satisfy all of the issues simultaneously. However, theextremes for each role frame the discussion or debate that needs to take place concerning ITSdeployment and the roles of the public and private sectors.

The involvement of each of the participants in ITS impacts deployment on both a national anda local level. The funding allocations required for each one of the schemes will be different.The public sector’s approach will dictate the amount of Federal, State and local fundingneeded. If the Federal government uses Federal incentives, that funding will be taken fromother sources to be applied to specific areas of interest, unless new sources of revenue areinstituted. The more assertive the State and local governments become, the more publicmoney it will take to fund the program. The private sector will invest more money as itbecomes more proactive. Investments must be made considering the short and long termreturns. Investments are also made on the basis of whether the deployment of a system todayleads to the deployment and increased profit of a new system in the future.

With this basic understanding of the public and private sector roles and a vision of how ITScould be deployed, it would be helpful to reach some degree of consensus on how ITS shouldproceed. A fundamental theme of the vision presented in Section 3 is the importance oftransportation data to private sector products and services, public sector systems, and theindividual traveler. The collection, exchange, and dissemination of transportation data is thebasis for many ITS services. It forms a “core infrastructure” around many of the userservices function. The development of that core infrastructure in the near-term will assist thedevelopment of other services. To accomplish this goal, infrastructure is required to collectthe data, communications facilities are required to make the data available to multiplesystems, and products and services are required to present the data to the user. As discussedin Section 5, issues concerning infrastructure deployment, such as operation and maintenancefunding, extent of deployment, market stimulation, and interagency cooperation all benefitfrom increased or more assertive involvement by the Federal, State, and local governments.Federal involvement through funding, encouragement, and leadership will stimulate the

102


development of a core infrastructure that will provide the basis for ITS market expansion.Assertive State and local involvement in the deployment of ITS, specifically coreinfrastructure systems, will make the expansion of the ITS market a reality. A more proactiveprivate sector will positively impact the development and dissemination of transportation datathrough the use of existing and new communications infrastructure and product and servicedeployments.

6.1 Recommendations for ITS Deployment

A clear national interest exists in:

. Realizing the benefits of enhanced transportation management, traveler services, safety,and productivity.

. Establishing the U.S. ITS market early to gain a competitive global advantage for thedomestic ITS industry.

To further this national interest, it is recommended:

. That the U.S. DOT be more assertive initially in facilitating the deployment of ITSinformation and communications infrastructure, leveraging off of private sector facilitiesand services wherever feasible -- a first step could include establishing and stimulating thecommunications and information infrastructure needed to deliver many of the ITS services,

. That the private sector retain primary responsibility for the development andcommercialization of transportation information delivery and in-vehicle systems, and

. That ITS America continue as the focal point of the public-private partnerships needed fornationwide implementation of the ITS program.

To accomplish this, the following roles are recommended.

Federal Role: To support the timely deployment of the information/communicationsinfrastructure necessary to foster a range of ITS information services, the U.S. DOT will needto:

. Stimulate and help fund the design, development, and deployment of major elements ofthe information/communications infrastructure,

. Facilitate the development and coordination of travel and transportation management databases, and

. Catalyze the necessary public and private institutional relationships.

103


The U.S. DOT should carry out these objectives by a system of funding incentives rather thanregulatory mandates. Where appropriate, new Federal funds should be identified to seed thedevelopment and deployment of infrastructure utilizing or in partnership with the privatesector wherever feasible. Consideration should be given to the use of private money andregular ISTEA funds on a matching basis.

To aid in achieving these objectives, it is also appropriate for the U.S. DOT to:

. Play an active role with public/private partnerships in defining and securingcommunications spectrum,

. Facilitate, with public/private partnerships, the near-term development of keycommunications and interface standards in such areas as traveler information, electronicclearance, and electronic toll collection deployment, for example.

The U.S. DOT should continue to invest in long term research, such as AHS, as well asintermediate development and operational testing in partnership with the private sector. TheU.S. DOT should also continue to develop the partnership with the private sector both directlyand through ITS America.

State and Local Government Role: The role of the State and local governments is todetermine the needs of their communities and deploy information/communicationsinfrastructure to satisfy those needs. To fulfill this role, they should make short and longrange plans for the deployment of ITS in their jurisdictions and be aware of the ITS solutionsavailable for their specific transportation problems. The State and local governments shouldwork closely with the U.S. DOT, the private sector, and ITS America to coordinatedeployments to achieve national compatibility.

Private Sector Role: The primary role of the private sector is to build and commercialize ITSproducts and services and to market them to consumers, industry, and the public sector. Tofulfill this role, the private sector needs to invest and engage in a variety of activitiesincluding research and development, market research, pilot tests, deployments, and systemevaluations. However, the decision for members of the private sector to take these actions isnot centralized. It consists of hundreds of individual decisions based on the perception offeasibility, marketability and the level of acceptable risk. The private sector must be preparedto take substantial risks in deploying both infrastructure systems and products, since manywill be available in advance of well-developed infrastructure and markets.

A well-balanced public sector role, in deploying the fundamental infrastructure needed tosupport in-vehicle, traveler, and other end-user information products, is vital in encouragingprivate sector decisions. The public sector role must be vigorous enough to stimulate privatesector participation, but not so assertive as to preempt the private sector role. Closecooperation between the private and public sectors is indispensable for achieving this balance.

104


ITS America Role: The ITS community, along with Congress through ISTEA, recognizesthat ITS will be developed and deployed most effectively through partnerships among thepublic sector, the private sector, and academia. ITS America is the embodiment of thispartnership and is playing a crucial role in bringing the participants together to workcooperatively in the creation of a national ITS program.

ITS America has a continuing role in bringing new interests and constituencies into the ITSprocess, broadening the base of ITS involvement through its technical committees and Statechapters, disseminating information through electronic and other means, and buildinginternational relationships. ITS America is key in guiding and building the consensus for thenational ITS architecture and for coordinating the development of standards and protocols. Itplays an important role in building support and providing education about ITS through itsoutreach program. ITS America’s involvement in consensus building has focused attention ontechnical and non-technical issues as well as promoting intermodalism. ITS Americarepresents a consensus forum through which the ITS community and the U.S. DOT cancommunicate ideas and concerns.

The recommendations and issues presented in this chapter must be considered and discussedby the ITS community, including the U.S. DOT. A strategy for deployment and the mosteffective involvement of the participants must be implemented. ITS deployments willcontinue to take place. Without a consensus direction of how ITS should proceed andwithout actions to steer its course, ITS deployment is left to forces that may not yield anationally compatible ITS system.

105

I - NATIONAL ITS PROGRAM PLAN CHAPTER VII - DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS

CHAPTER VII - DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The successful deployment of ITS products and systems hinges on surmounting both technicaland nontechnical challenges. Dedicated efforts will be required to facilitate the negotiation ofthese challenges. The information intensive nature of ITS requires fundamental changes inthe institutional aspects of how transportation business has been conducted for many years.The Congress recognized the importance of nontechnical issues by requiring the U.S. DOT tosubmit a report assessing these challenges confronting deployment. To fulfill thisrequirement, the U.S. DOT implemented a research program evaluating a whole range ofinstitutional considerations associated with facilitating deployment. Addressing institutionalissues as a routine aspect of most ITS deployments will be an on-going and concerted effort.While this effort drives development of solutions to nontechnical problems, the researchcommunities in the private sector, academia, and Federal government agencies will dedicatetheir efforts to surmounting technological hurdles impeding deployment of ITS applicationsand products which satisfy needs of local communities and have strong market acceptance.Compelling as they may be, challenges to deployment will be overcome in stages. Someproblems will be posed in the near-term and some will exert their influences throughout theevolutionary deployment period.

The objective of this Deployment Considerations chapter is to address some of the near- andlong-term challenges and to offer recommended approaches for their resolution. This chapterinitially addresses some near-term activities for dealing with barriers that inhibit theachievement of the five-year vision presented in Chapter VI, Deployment. This is followedby a discussion of major categories of long-term issues confronting deployment withrecommendations for program element definition and initial year funding.

2.0 THE NEAR-TERM CHALLENGES - MAKING A DIFFERENCE SOON

Facilitating ITS deployment in accordance with the vision described in Chapter VI,Deployment requires recognition of the challenges and barriers. The five-year vision presentsan opportunity to implement solutions to the barriers that exist in that timeframe and measuretheir success in the near-term. The environment for achieving the five-year vision of ITSdeployment will be essentially the same as it is today. ISTEA will remain in effect until1997. Current Federally funded programs will continue at levels determined on an annualbasis. Measures to facilitate ITS deployment will be shaped from the experiences gatheredfrom on-going activities. As these lessons are learned, they will point to new approaches,some of which are discussed in Chapter VI. In the five-year timeframe, deployment decisionswill continue to be made in a distributed or local manner. Near-term deployment will beinfluenced by modest, but sound, program adjustments. From the experiences of currentdeployment and the vision of deployment in the five-year timeframe, the followingdeployment challenges have been identified:

107


There is inadequate sensor infrastructure in place to support robust data collection.The lack of nationally accepted standards is inhibiting development and marketing ofcertain products and systems.Market uncertainty is fostering caution in private sector product developers and serviceproviders.Operations and maintenance requirements and funding for ITS are not accommodated inexisting planning and budget processes in some transportation agencies.Privacy is a concern for participants in programs which require vehicle tracking.Liability concerns arise from introducing in-vehicle systems which could either distractdrivers or assume some control over the vehicle.Partnerships are encountering difficulties.

The following paragraphs address each of these challenges and present recommendations toresolve them.

2.1 Issue: Sensor Infrastructure

The national sensor infrastructure deployment base is neither adequately robust nor availableto support system applications dependent on real-time traffic information. Severalmetropolitan areas have made significant investments in loop detectors and closed circuittelevision cameras, with supporting microwave capabilities. Some operational tests featurevehicle probes. The potential for expanding the sensor infrastructure to enable dynamic routeguidance or to enhance traffic control and incident management is limited by cost andtechnology constraints. A related technical hurdle in the case of dynamic route guidance isfiltering relevant traffic data for directed transmission to individual receivers. Under ISTEA,local and regional jurisdictions installing and operating the sensor infrastructure must take theinitiative to invest based on a cost/benefit analysis. Their priorities, as well as the prioritiesof legislative assemblies and elected officials, may lie in other areas and they may besensitive to the associated ITS operations and maintenance costs. Expanding the sensorinfrastructure must be “sold” to local and regional decision-makers as a beneficial investment.

Program Recommendation: Sensor Infrastructure - 1

Currently, there are six operational tests, in varying stages of maturity, which are centered onthe installation and use of sensor-based systems for traffic management and travelerinformation: ADVANCE; Borman Expressway Advanced Traffic Management Systems;“Capital’‘-Washington, D.C. Area Operational Test; Connecticut Freeway Advanced TrafficManagement Systems; DIRECT; and FAST-TRAC. A Federal government initiative shouldbe explored which assembles a “lessons learned/benefits analysis” presentation on these testexperiences to date. The FHWA field organizations should offer this presentation to Stateand local transportation organizations and municipal planning organizations at appropriatetimes in their planning cycles. In jurisdictions with an expressed desire to expand traffic

108


management/traveler information capabilities, these levels of government should be providedaccess to as much public domain information in this area as is practical.

Program Recommendation: Sensor Infrastructure - 2

ITS America should convene the privately operated, nationally based traffic advisoryenterprises (Metro-Traffic and Shadow Traffic) to explore means by which their advisoriescould be converted to media more compatible with traffic management center operations suchas digital communications. If traffic data could be transmitted in digital media to subscriberssupported by associated billing capabilities (inherent in cellular operations, for example),privatized infrastructure might increase rapidly.

2.2 Issue: Lack of Nationally Accepted Standards

Near-term, nationally accepted standards are needed to reduce product and systemdevelopment risk. The National ITS Architecture Development Program will help identifyrequired ITS standards and protocols when it is completed in mid-1996. However, severalrequired standards have already been identified and can be developed prior to the adoption ofa national architecture to facilitate near-term deployment. Some of these standards are beingdeveloped now. The following program initiatives are recommended:

Program Recommendations: Standards - 1

Development should be expedited for standards that are independent of a national ITSarchitecture and that can support near-term ITS deployment. Examples of such standardsinclude: electronic payment and automatic vehicle location (such as for public transportationand commercial fleet applications), map databases, and traffic management system interfaceprotocols. Standards for electronic payment should be coordinated with other interestedparties such as the financial industry.

Program Recommendation: Standards - 2

Using the results of Phase 1 of the National ITS Architecture Development Program, thearchitectures should be examined to determine which additional standards and protocols arerequired. These additional standards and protocol requirements should be prioritized and thendeveloped accordingly. The review and prioritization process should be repeated when thenational architecture is adopted at the conclusion of Phase 2 in mid-1996.

Program Recommendation: Standards - 3

Development of the enhanced 9-l-l standard to assist emergency response services in locatingemergencies should be expedited if the standard is determined to be architecture-independent.The enhanced 9-l-l standard should be developed in conjunction with the 9-l-l community.

109


Early development of an enhanced 9-l-l standard will posture emergency response servicesfor wide deployment.

2.3 Issue: Market Uncertainty

The Volpe National Transportation Systems Center (VNTSC) is developing electronic tollcollection (ETC) user acceptance case studies. Data emerging from these case studies shouldbe disseminated widely throughout the ETC community. On a regional basis, this informationwill provide States, MPOs and private sector service providers a comprehensive understandingof ETC users’ willingness to pay. Providing this type of information to deploying entities iscritical because, among the several factors generating market uncertainty, two appear mostcompelling:

. the perception that the service will be expensive, and

. the lack of validated information to establish the value of the service in the marketplace.

The increasing number of ETC projects, either in operation or in planning, suggests that theservice is meeting with increased acceptance. New York, Illinois, Kansas, Oklahoma, Florida,Texas, Virginia, and Washington, among others, have or are planning ETC projects usually insome partnership-consortia arrangement.

Experiences from several operational tests deploying other systems have been documented inthe IVHS Institutional Issues and Case Studies report prepared by Science ApplicationsInternational Corporation (SAIC) for VNTSC. In this report, some measures have beenidentified as applicable for ETC projects. The following recommendations draw upon thecase study experiences. This issue of Market Uncertainty is also covered as a long-termchallenge in Paragraph 3.7 of this chapter.

Program Recommendation: Market Uncertainty - 1

Organizations/partnerships or consortia approaching the deployment of ETC should includerepresentatives of the user community (as defined in the particular deployment area) in theirplanning, testing, and evaluation phases. Establishing communication channels at the localgovernment level to reach citizens provides early and reliable insights into the acceptance ofETC at projected, full deployment price levels.


In public/private partnerships, the public sector participants should take an active role inassisting the private sector participants with marketing efforts. In the Westchester CommuterCentral (WCC) project, Westchester County experienced significant success through activepublic sector involvement in assisting private sector partners.

110



The ITS America/U.S. DOT outreach program should lend strong emphasis on the successesand benefits of ETC projects underway. The successes and benefits should be balanced withrepresentative sample costs.

2.4 Issue: Operations and Maintenance

Systems delivering incident management and traffic management are maintenance-intensiveand require dedicated operational facilities and staffing. The challenge associated withsupporting operations and maintenance is centered on identifying funding sources anddeveloping rewarding career fields in the private and public sectors for long-term sustainment.Deployments which have successfully coped with establishing and sustaining operations andmaintenance programs have followed thorough planning procedures. The early recognition ofthe need and commitment to raise and allocate dedicated funding, have been key elements insuccessful deployments. In Chapter VI, Deployment, a scenario is presented in which theFederal government takes an active role in guiding and funding ITS deployments andactivities. A highly beneficial Federal investment possibility in this environment could befunding targeted at operations and maintenance activities.

Program Recommendation: Operations and Maintenance

The tailored outreach recommendation outlined in Paragraph 3.1 advocates a multi-disciplinary team interacting with transportation planners. Consideration would be given tooperations and maintenance issues addressing sustainment of newly installed facilities. TheITS Early Deployment Planning Program, while not heavily focused in this area, identifiesoperations and maintenance as a consideration.

2.5 Issue: Privacy

Privacy is an issue of concern in almost every ITS deployment where information is recorded.In this discussion, the areas of AVI and AVL provide the most illustrative examples.Program recommendations to mitigate privacy concerns associated with expanding AVI andAVL systems are derived from experiences in several operational tests where the privacyimpediment was confronted. HELP/Crescent, TravTek, ADVANCE and TRANSCOM/TRANSMIT all included technologies that enabled the identification, location and speed ofthe individual vehicles being tracked. This concern, sometimes referred to as the “BigBrother” issue, was perceived by truckers participating in HELP/Crescent to enable theFederal government to initiate a national-level weight/distance tax using AVI. This tax,which is based on a combination of weight and distance traveled, is unpopular with truckingcompanies and delayed the project’s ability to recruit carriers to participate in the program.On a different level, individual truckers who were interviewed felt that transponders would

111


allow truck company management to track their movements and impose sanctions orpenalties.

TravTek and ADVANCE experienced similar challenges in recruiting volunteer drivers fromthe public at large. The system operation and evaluation aspects of ADVANCE requiredtracking drivers over several years, versus a maximum of two months for TravTek. WhileTravTek did not experience serious recruitment problems, there are some residual concernsamong ADVANCE participants, even though they are not tracked in real time as is the casein TravTek.

Those participating in TRANSCOM/TRANSMIT expressed a general concern about theperception that government could, at any time, know the whereabouts of any vehicle using thesystem and track vehicle speed for enforcement purposes.

Against this background of recent operational test experiences, the following summarydescribes the mitigation strategies employed to address the privacy concerns. This summaryis in the form of program recommendations which are offered from the sole perspective ofovercoming the privacy challenge in deploying ITS systems and without any intent to promotethe obstruction of traffic law enforcement.

Operational test mitigation strategy summarv: The most effective means of protecting driveridentity is in the design of in-vehicle units and the way in which a system is operated. Boththe ADVANCE and TravTek partnership participants ensured that volunteers from the generalpublic were made aware that their locations would be tracked. In both cases, databasescontaining the names of participants were separated from databases containing the operationalinformation (i.e., how the systems were used, etc.). In the case of TRANSMIT, authoritiesdefused privacy issues before they surfaced. TRANSMIT uses a random number system,therefore, it does not track or maintain vehicle identification records. Project authorities haveadopted a policy not to release vehicle speed/travel time information to enforcementauthorities. Prior to implementation, TRANSCOM will promote a public informationcampaign to explain clearly what government can and will not do with the data it gathers.

Program Recommendation: Privacy - 1

It is recommended that partnerships deploying AVI and AVL systems sponsor a study todetermine and gain consensus for an optimal approach for protecting driver identity. A keyelement of the study should be the feasibility/advisability of implementing managementsystems which compartmentalize databases to preclude revealing driver identity.

112


Program Recommendation: Privacy - 2

It is recommended that prior to system implementation, the issue of the release of vehiclespeed data to enforcement authorities be addressed and decided by deployment partners, and acomprehensive public/participant education/awareness program be implemented.

2.6 Issue: Liability

Liability has been identified as an impediment to expanding collision avoidance deploymentsas well as some in-vehicle navigation displays. The components of ITS, such as newtechnology, innovative approaches to problems, and exposure to the public, collectively raiseconcerns about liability. The liability concerns include system components which coulddistract drivers, provide incorrect or illegal directions, overload drivers with information, orfail to operate as advertised. The operational test experiences involving liability, thoughinformative, are of limited value. The test partnerships “worked around” the problem byhaving participants sign informed consent forms which spell out the risks to the driver as aresult of participation in a test. These forms also advise participants of the right to drop outat any time without penalty.

The most obvious mitigation strategy for liability concerns is to design safety into systems.For example, TravTek, the General Motors’ driver display interface design precluded thedriver from manipulating the screen while the vehicle was in motion. When the engine wasstarted, the display would flash a disclaimer that the system was experimental and that safedriving was the driver’s responsibility.

Data collected from operational test experience was obtained from project managementpersonnel. In all cases these managers had no knowledge of the legal foundation fordetermining liability. The following program recommendations are presented to establish aninformation base from which a clearer picture may be defined.

Program Recommendation: Liability - 1

It is recommended that the Federal government conduct a review of the legal foundations ofliability for in-vehicle systems and provide a report. The objective of this report is solely toprovide interested stakeholders with an understanding of the factors incurring liability.

Program Recommendation: Liability - 2

It is recommended that ITS America conduct exploratory discussions with automobileinsurance association representatives to determine the industry’s position with regard toinsuring drivers with ITS devices.

113


2 . 7 I s s u e : Partnerships

Shortcomings in partnership arrangements have been singled out as impeding the expansion offuture electronic clearance as a central CVO service. In developing programrecommendations to mitigate this challenge, case studies conducted on the HELP/Crescent andAdvantage I-75 operational tests were used. Advantage I-75 is a CVO project established asan international public-private partnership. It provides a test-bed for deploying advancedtechnologies designed to increase transport efficiency along I-75. The Heavy VehicleElectronic License Plate (HELP) Program was a multi-state, international research effort todevelop an integrated heavy vehicle monitoring system using AVI, automated vehicleclassification (AVC) and weigh-in-motion (WIM) technologies. Advantage I-75 is in theinstallation and pre-testing phase, while the HELP/Crescent operational field test wasconcluded in September 1993. The HELP operational deployment continues under theauspices of HELP, Incorporated. A summary of partnership problems evident in both projectsinclude the following:

. Lack of trust among partners.

. Poor communications between partners.

Lack of trust in the CVO projects originated from a trucking industry perception that theirpublic sector counterparts were principally motivated by developing the use of technologiesfor implementing weight/distance taxation. This problem was aggravated, possiblyunintentionally, by the exclusion of the trucking industry as a fully vested partner in thedesign of CVO initiatives. Finally, there is a traditional “regulated” vs “regulator”relationship between the two partners. In this area of ITS, the users are regulated by thepublic sector while concurrently playing the key role in transportation. National and Statetrucking associations, though not always in harmony, exert significant influence. Theseorganizations were cited by the case studies as not being included as full partners in the CVOprojects.

Poor communications are cited in the case studies as being prevalent during some phase ofthe CVO projects. One major reason noted is the large number of organizational playersinvolved. Single representatives from the States managed the interests of multiple Stateorganizations without being able to coordinate across all appropriate State agencies. This wasevident in defining goals and responsibilities in the conduct of project phases.

The following measures were implemented to improve these partnership areas:

. Lack of trust between the public and private sector participants in both CVO projects wassignificantly improved by involving the trucking industry in the design of the systems.

. Communications have been enhanced by public sector measures to accommodate theinterests of all meeting participants. States with multiple representatives at ITS meetingscan feed their concerns to a single State representative who integrates a State position on

114


issues. Some State departments of transportation have created an ITS program office toserve as the focal point for ITS matters. This has been beneficial to State DOTS, but notnecessarily to other State agencies whose positions are not represented frequently by DOTITS focal points.

In light of this experience base, the following program recommendations are made to improvethe potential for near-term CVO deployment.

Program Recommendation: Partnerships - 1

It is recommended that private-public partnerships undertaking CVO deployments involveappropriate trucking industry associations at the beginning of the project, and solicit theirparticipation in system design, deployment, and operation.

Program Recommendation: Partnerships - 2

It is recommended that State DOTS undertaking CVO projects designate a single focal pointoffice for ITS activities and empower that office to coordinate across State agency lines.

3.0 LONG-TERM CHALLENGES - AN OVERVIEW

While acknowledging the merit of measures which can accelerate near-term deploymentactivities, it is important to retain a long-term perspective in pursuing the vision of ITS in tothe next century. Some deployment challenges will endure throughout the evolution of ITSdeployment.

There are a number of issue categories which have been identified as crucial to the successfulexpansion of ITS applications to transportation problems. The following sections aresummaries of the categories with associated major issues and recommended programapproaches designed to promote resolution. Applicable on-going initiatives whose results willcontribute to resolving these issues are also identified. The programmatic specifics associatedwith the program recommendations (i.e., funding, program definition, etc.) are not included,but the timing for recommended actions is addressed. The programmatic details will beadded to the NPP when:

. an approved recommendation is integrated into the budget formulation process at the U.S.DOT, or

. the appropriate non-Federal organization has accepted an activity recommendation anddeveloped implementation details.

The issue categories identified as mainstays of the deployment support program throughoutthe evolution of ITS are:

115


. Organizational and Cultural Change . Legal Implications

. Partnerships . Outreach

. Procurement . Market Uncertainty and Risk

. Environmental Considerations . Societal Issues

The organizational scheme in this section outlines the Zssue, defines the Dimensions of theChallenge, presents a Summary Assessment of needed activities and potentially productivemeasures, and follows up with the Approach which describes, in most cases, ActivitiesUnderway and makes Program Recommendations.

3.1 Organizational and Cultural Change

Issue: Many experienced transportation professionals view technology-based solutions totransportation problems with skepticism based on their experiences with early systems.Higher priority is often placed on capital investments that add capacity or maintain existinginfrastructure, rather than on systems that require commitment to operations and maintenance.Technology-based solutions, in many cases, are not routinely considered in State/localplanning processes.

3.1.1 Dimensions of the Challenge

A significant number of transportation professionals who hold decision-making authority havebeen influenced by frustrating experiences with earlier high-technology system deployments.Some systems implemented in the last twenty years were not supported by adequate planning,were under-funded for sustaining operations and maintenance, and proved to be maintenance-intensive embarrassments driven by unreliable software programs. The consideration oftechnology-based solutions to transportation problems is not universally embedded in Stateand local government transportation planning processes. For some, ITS-based applications arenot viewed as contributing to reliable, time-tested solutions to current transportation problems.

3.1.2 Summary Assessment

At this point in the program, there is, in some areas, lack of clear definition about programboundaries. Many interpret the ITS program as being comprised only of operational tests andcorridor projects funded by ITS appropriations. There is a compelling need among those inthe process of planning near-term, state-of-the-art system deployments with routine fundingsources to know whether or not ITS applications hold the potential for integration into anevolving national ITS architecture. Since ITS will evolve through the varied efforts ofmultiple stakeholders, there is no single, programmatic vision that describes the capabilities ofthe technology and how they might impact on the unique needs of a community. Theseconditions make moving ITS into the “mainstream” more difficult. ITS will become acceptedmore readily if it is not viewed as a distinct, separate entity attempting to break into theroutine of transportation planning. ITS is not, and was never intended to be, a stand-alone

116


solution to traffic, incident or public transit management. ITS facilitates the resolutions oftransportation problems by harnessing technology. While ITS requires the adaptation of manypractices, it must be brought into the mainstream of those practices. In their most effectiveform, ITS considerations will be fully integrated into metropolitan planning processes,environmental assessment processes and State/regional planning.

3.1.3 Approach

Activities Underway

. The ITS Institutional and Legal Issues Program employs operational test case studies toassess institutional issues and legal impediments associated with deployments.

Program Recommendations

. An outreach initiative should be tailored to the community of transportation professionalswho conduct planning and make the recommendations for new investment at the State andlocal levels. The proposal advocates sending multi-disciplinary teams to State and locallevel sites to interact with planners. The interaction would solicit local needs and presentlessons learned in the operational test and corridor program activities. Potential ITS-basedsolutions, having demonstrated positive results in satisfying similar needs, would beidentified. Evolutionary planning would be outlined and, at a minimum, the considerationof ITS applications would be embedded in planning processes. It is recommended that apilot program be established in 1996.

. Development of an “expert system” is proposed to coincide with the adoption of a nationalITS architecture in 1996. This software program would be provided to planners incommunities which may not have the opportunity to interact with multi-disciplinarycontact teams. It would allow a transportation planner to load the system with localmetrics and develop architecturally-compatible potential applications to community needs.

3.2 Partnerships

Issue: Traditional transportation construction/acquisition models involve a single jurisdiction.ITS deployments will be multi-jurisdictional and regional. Partnerships among public sectorentities, between the two sectors, and among private sector organizations will be crucial tosuccess. The fundamental differences in motivation between the public and private sectorspose a challenge to the development of effective partnerships and frequently create difficultiesin accurately defining the obstacles to potentially effective partnership arrangements. This along-term ITS challenge which will influence deployment planning at different levels ofintensity across the nation for the foreseeable future.

117



Traditional roles and responsibilities will experience significant change during the evolutionof ITS. The high potential for privatization, or joint operation of functions historicallyassociated with government, is one dimension of the challenge facing the acceptance ofpartnerships. Private sector participation brings great potential benefit in the form of technicalexpertise, marketing experience, and opportunities to reduce public funding requirements.The implementation of successful partnerships is highly dependent on the mutual recognitionthat the two sectors operate with fundamentally different motivations and measures of success.A significant challenge for successful deployment will be harnessing the different operatingstyles and driving motivations behind common ITS goals.


Effectively facilitating future partnership arrangements requires an understanding of thesources of friction and conflict which may detract from cooperation. The most productivesources of this information are the operational test bed and early deployment activities. Thethrust of program initiatives undertaken to support future partnership ventures should evaluate,document, and disseminate the lessons collected through those experiences. This processshould produce a body of guidelines for establishing and sustaining subsequent partnershipendeavors.

3.2.3 Approach

Activities Underway

. There is a concerted effort sponsored by the ITS Institutional and Legal Issues Program toprepare case studies and spin off “lessons learned” reports which use operational test andother deployment experiences as a test bed for identifying partnership problem areas.

. The ITS Public/Private Partnership Regional Workshop Program is conducting six regionalworkshops to develop a baseline of supporting documentation on public/privatepartnerships and their roles in ITS deployment activities.

. Projects such as the I-95 Corridor Coalition, which brings together 12 State DOTS with 11independent transportation and toll authorities and 3 Federal agencies, present a richopportunity to explore the means for improving coordination and communications insupport of better serving the travel needs of the communities in the corridor.

118



. An annotated user’s guide documenting critical information to be used by State and localagencies as an aid in developing institutional arrangements is recommended. It isrecommended for funding in FY 96.

3 . 3 Procurement

Issue: Traditional procurement methods are not compatible with ITS procurements. ITSapplications, in general, will require a systems design approach and cross-jurisdictionalcooperation in order to optimize effectiveness. High technology procurements crossingjurisdictional lines pose problems for both public sector organizations and private sectorproviders. Public sector organizations must follow inflexible procurement regulations.Private sector providers are confronted with adhering to a complex maze of procedureschanging across the boundaries of the proposed procurement. This is a mid- to long-termchallenge which will impact heavily on regional deployments.


The deployment of ITS systems across jurisdictional boundaries requires coordination.Government agencies and competing product and service providers will be confronted withpotentially conflicting regulations and requirements. The coordination efforts will be time-intensive and will create uncertainty for all participants. In many State and local jurisdictions,the experience level in acquiring high technology systems is still maturing. Definingspecifications, establishing selection criteria, and working around potentially counter-productive low bid-compliance regulations may contribute to confusion, frustration and, thus,delay. While specific points of contention will vary with each case, some have the potentialfor recurring on a frequent basis. Examples include, but are not limited to the following:

. Product and system providers may develop a concern for the protection of intellectualproperty rights in cases where the public sector customer demands proprietary informationbe placed in the public domain. Procedures and policies ensuring protection of title toinventions are essential to fostering technological innovation.

. Compliance with cost accounting/certification and auditing requirements, at any level ofgovernment, may have significant impact. Direct Federal procurements are subject toFederal requirements which may obligate vendors to implement new accounting systemsand acquire knowledge of specialized procedures. By contrast, ITS procurements fundedunder Federal grants and cooperative agreements conducted by State and local governmententities incur greatly simplified Federal requirements.

. Organizational conflict of interest limitations may constrain the selection of firms as bothdesigners and builders of ITS applications. While State and local procurements are not

119


governed by Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) provisions, some States may have theirown regulatory requirements that impose the same prohibitions. While these limitationsare appropriate in many situations, technology procurements offer a compelling need forreconsideration of this area.


Simplifying and streamlining procurement procedures are critical for facilitating deploymentof ITS. The number of participating governmental jurisdictions precludes an all-encompassingsolution. Since procurement regulation is, by definition, a government function, managers ateach level of government will have to develop means of facilitating ITS procurement actions.A reasonable goal in the Federal arena is to search for flexibility in the FARs with regard totechnology acquisitions. States should conduct joint reviews with adjoining States andjurisdictions involved in regional deployments. This process should become embedded inplanning processes for any multi-jurisdictional deployment. The crucial element for success isto consider procurement challenges early in the planning cycle.

3.3.3 Approach


. A joint State-Federal program is recommended to study Federal and State procurementregulations with the objective of streamlining Federal regulatory requirements.

. A cooperative program between the Federal government and the States is recommended toidentify proposed revisions in State procurement guidelines. Special areas of interest inprocurement reform should examine:

- Intellectual property rights.- Cost accounting/cost certification and auditing requirements.- Procurement compliance costs.- Organizational conflict of interest limitations.

Both program elements are recommended for definition in FY 96 and resourcing in FY 97.

3.4 Environmental Considerations

Issue: There is no clearly-defined understanding of how ITS deployments will/may affectmandated environmental requirements. This challenge will be a continuing feature ofdeployment planning for infrastructure-based user services. It is a long-term consideration forITS which holds the potential for significant impact on deployment rates.

120



When deployed in mutually-supporting combinations, ITS applications can make significantcontributions to energy conservation and the attainment of environmental quality goals.Assessing the impact of ITS deployment on the environment is dependent on knowledge ofthe specific systems selected, the features of the environment in which deployment is beingconsidered, and how deploying entities will choose to meet their unique needs. There is noconsistent formula for arriving at definitive conclusions about the environmental impacts ofdeployment. In principle, ITS technologies hold the potential to reduce vehicle emissions andsupport the Clean Air Act.


A major contributing factor to the development of deployment strategies which will supportenvironmental goals is additional research.

3.4.3 Approach


. A series of research and data collection projects is recommended to develop userguidelines to support deploying entities in both the public and private sectors. Theseprojects would leverage operational tests, to the extent possible, and the ITS EarlyDeployment Planning Program. Essential elements of research and modeling would focuson:

- Analyzing travel behavior patterns.- Modeling vehicle emissions under several modes of vehicle operation. Recommended

for funding in FY 96.

. Research and data collection initiatives should be coordinated with two on-going U.S.DOT model development efforts: The Benefits Framework Project and The Travel ModelImprovement Program.

3.5 Legal Implications

Issue: ITS deployments have a high probability of confronting a wide range of legalimplications. Each deployment situation will be different and will be addressed or, ifnecessary, litigated individually. There is a compelling need to compile and document theprecedents and decisions of common legal experiences and approaches used in ITSdeployments.

121



Some legal issues, frequently identified as possible constraints to ITS system deployment,have recently been reconsidered. Tort liability in traffic management and traveler informationservices, according to several involved participants, is now viewed as a manageable risk underexisting law. Intellectual property issues (briefly discussed in Paragraph 3.3 “Procurement”)covering patents, copyrights, trademarks and trade secrets continue to be a potential source oftime-consuming concerns. Many of these concerns will arise from the adoption of uniformnational standards, the acquisition of technologies by State and local governments, and thecommercial exploitation of data gathered through ITS applications.

Tort liability, while a matter of decreasing concern in traffic management and travelerinformation, is a key issue in automated vehicle control systems. The nature of these systemsintroduces the possibility of shifting accident liability from vehicle operators tovehicle/component manufacturers and automated highway operators. As the automatedhighway system develops, liability should be examined.

Some regulatory requirements may inhibit implementing certain ITS applications. Aprominent example resides in State safety regulations prohibiting in-vehicle video displayscreens. Hazardous materials incident response may be constrained by regulations governingthe dissemination of hazardous load tracking information.

Privatization of traditionally public sector roles (discussed in Paragraphs 3.2 “Partnerships”and 3.3 “Procurement”) introduces legal questions regarding States’ prerogatives to delegategovernment enforcement authority to private sector organizations and to grant exclusivefranchises.

Delegation of authority emerges in another context. The inherent need for close coordinationand joint funding among multiple jurisdictions in ITS operations introduces issues of Stateagencies delegating vested authority (for various functions) to regional entities or consortia.

Privacy issues have been identified in the context of:

. surveillance technology implementation;

. electronic payment services;

. public posting of ride-sharing information; and

. commercial vehicle operations.


Each of the potential issues addressed in paragraph 3.5.1, may have to be addressed in thecourse of ITS implementation. In cases where Federal law is suspected of presenting adeployment-related constraint, the applicable code can be researched, and summary opinions

122


can be made available. In many cases, State law will present a potential impediment. Thissuggests that ITS partnerships/consortia should address issues on a case-by-case basis in theaffected regions. The task of conducting a comprehensive survey of State law for a largenumber of States appears prohibitive.

3.5.3 Approach

Activities Underway

. Several U.S. DOT/ITS America-sponsored conferences, courses of study and projects arein progress to focus on liability and contracting issues:

- The Liability Conference convenes experts in liability and ITS to reach consensus onidentifying high/low risk deployment activities.

- “The Legal Constraints and Fair Access Issues Related to Franchising in-GroundCommunications Technologies Along Highway Rights of Way” Project is determiningapproaches for franchising rights to installing communications infrastructure.

Program Recommendation

. A series of research initiatives is recommended to develop policy guidelines onintellectual property and identify high risk liability issues. Program definition isrecommended for FY 95 and should include the near-term program recommendation citedin Paragraph 2.6 of this chapter (please see Program Recommendation: Liability - 1).Initial program implementation is recommended for funding in FY 96.

3.6 Outreach

Issue: On a nation-wide basis, there are differing levels of understanding and awareness ofITS. Education of a wide range of stakeholders is critical to the successful acceptance of ITSproducts and services. In some cases outreach seeks to foster general awareness of ITS, whilein other instances, outreach is issue-specific. Target audiences can be segmented, and eachrequires a uniquely designed educational/outreach approach. Note: This section will notaddress the “tailored outreach” proposal recommended in Paragraph 3.1.3 of “Organizationaland Cultural Change”.


ITS projects and product deployments are becoming more visible. The near-term planninghorizon for ITS, 3-to-5 years, is critical in several respects: a national ITS architecture willbe adopted, and public support will be sought for deployment decisions addressed at the State,regional (MPO), and local government levels. In the current environment, awareness ofproducts, services, and potential benefits is not uniform. At many State and local level

123


organizations, decision-makers who could play a major role in proliferating ITS applicationshave only a vague understanding of available ITS options for supplementing highwayconstruction. Many members of Congress are under-informed about the potential of ITS.


The Federal Government and ITS America in Fiscal Year 1995 confront a critically importantyear for increasing public awareness and developing an education program. Fiscal Year 1996will bring key events such as the adoption of a national ITS architecture and the accelerationof standards-setting. These risk reduction measures may not fulfill their potential on the ITSprogram without development of some momentum in public anticipation and demand forservices. Awareness is needed to maintain a level of understanding about technologies andbenefits among the consumer public. An education program is needed to keep specific groupsof people informed of ITS activities. These groups include State, MPO, and localgovernment-appointed and elected officials who deal with transportation issues, private sectorstakeholders, and opinion-makers.

3.6.3 Approach


. A joint U.S. DOT/ITS America outreach program should be developed which leveragesand expands activities currently underway. The ITS America Speakers’ Bureau and thedevelopment of speakers’ kits offer a baseline from which a series of target-specificpresentation packages can be developed. The recommended audience segments include:

- the transportation consumer;- educators and students at levels from secondary school through university;- the trucking community;- elected and appointed officials; andpublic transportation officials in the disciplines of design, administration, planning,

operations and maintenance.

. Program definition for a National Strategic Communications Plan for IntelligentTransportation Systems is recommended for Fiscal Year 1995 with funding of selectedinitiatives to begin in second quarter Fiscal Year 1995. (This Plan is currently underdevelopment by ITS America).

3.7 Market Uncertainty and Risk

Issue: The market for ITS products is clouded by uncertainty. Potential private sectorproviders need risk assessment to support investment strategies. Public sector authorities

124


require an understanding of potential public acceptance of ITS to support deploymentplanning.


Potential private sector providers seek an understanding of the commercial potential for theirproducts and services. The potential for return on investment is not clearly quantifiable andthe time-phasing of market development is also undefined. A common concern is theinability to predict when publicly-funded infrastructure will be in place to interact with in-vehicle systems. This uncertainty has a retarding effect on privately-funded research anddevelopment.


Market uncertainty adds a new dimension to the public/private partnership working to advanceITS. Traditional government reluctance towards involvement in private sector businessdecisions and market operations (other than in a regulatory mode) can inhibit progress. Thegovernment’s major contribution to reducing risk is creating favorable conditions for settingstandards by conducting the national ITS architecture program and fulfilling the Congressionalmandate to ensure national compatibility.

3.7.3 Approach

Activities Underway

. VNTSC is preparing a series of case studies on user acceptance issues in automatedvehicle location, electronic toll collection/smart cards, and cellular telephones.

. VNTSC is developing guidelines for the evaluation of user acceptance issues inoperational tests and deployments.


. An immediate analysis of the four national ITS architecture contract teams’ cost analysesand market penetration estimates is recommended. These items are delivered to theGovernment as Phase 1 products. This analytical summary should be made available tointerested parties through either ITS America or FHWA.

. The development of a joint U.S. DOT/ITS America-sponsored research effort directed atdeveloping an on-going assessment of market acceptance for each user service “bundle” isrecommended. Program definition, to include allocation of research task sponsorship toITS America and the U.S. DOT is recommended for completion in Fiscal Year 1995. Theprogram is recommended for funding in Fiscal Year 1996, concurrently with the adoptionof a national ITS architecture.

125


3.8 Societal Issues

Issue: Widespread deployment of ITS systems and products is likely to be accompanied bysocietal implications not yet fully understood. A thorough understanding of societal issuesoffers the opportunity for the deployment of ITS technology to result in significant socialbenefits. Equity of access to ITS services and benefits, impacts on seniors and the disabledwith special needs, and effects on pedestrians and on community livability, are importantsocietal considerations. These kinds of societal considerations are crucial factors influencingpublic acceptance and the potential for successful deployment of ITS technologies.

By assessing societal implications early in the process of ITS development and deploymentand integrating societal, institutional, and technical prospectives, it may be possible tomaximize its potential to improve quality of life, make its benefits widely and equitablyavailable, and avoid unnecessary conflict with other societal goals.


The long range implications of widespread ITS deployment are difficult to anticipate. Somemembers of society are likely to be more impacted than others, but there is no definitivesupporting research. There is a compelling need for sound, analytically-based research effortsto attempt to define both the positive and negative effects of deployment on components ofsociety and to seek ways to optimize the benefits.

Issues of concern include:

. Impacts on Elderly and Disabled Individuals By the year 2020, 17 percent of thepopulation will be age 65 or older, and out of these, more than half will be 75 years oldor older. The Americans with Disabilities Act made access to public transportation fordisabled individuals a national goal. ITS user services may make it possible tocompensate for some of the impairments associated with advancing age or physicaldisabilities that reduce safe driving skills and interfere with safe and convenient use ofpublic transportation.

. Impact on Communities The familiar goals of ITS are to harness advanced technologiesto reduce congestion, enhance mobility, and improve safety and the environment. Yet,combined with other advanced technologies, ITS may have positive benefits not yetimagined for improving transportation in American communities. There also is a need tobetter understand how improvements in mobility can be joined with policies to bettermanage the growth in transportation demand. Travel demand is linked to social attitudestoward the use of different transportation modes, social policy with regard to land use,public concern for safe and healthy environments, and other complex societal factors. ITSpublic and private sector participants should foster discussion of these issues, which mayvary from one community to another.

126


. Equity in Distribution of Benefits and Costs Assuming ITS is supported in part by aninfrastructure paid for by public funds, the benefits and costs of ITS must be equitablydistributed throughout society. ITS services must not be available only to those who canafford sophisticated technology and must not widen the gap between social, geographic,and economic groups. Though equity in deployment is difficult to define and may not befully achievable, study of ITS users’ ability to use, to benefit, and to pay must beconducted to guide ITS policy making.

. Impacts on the Vulnerable Road User Pedestrians and bicyclists comprise a substantialportion of roadway users. Their vulnerability is reflected in their representing about 15%of the deaths in the U.S. from traffic accidents. Positive and negative effects of ITStechnology on this group need to be addressed.

. Access and Intermodalism The nation is moving toward the provision of an intermodaltransportation system that will be available to all users for all purpose. ITS deploymentoffers tremendous opportunity to increase the mobility of the access-disadvantaged portionof the U.S. population.


There is a wide range of societal issues that must be assessed to optimize the impact onsociety of the deployment of ITS technology. The range of user services has the potential toimpact virtually every segment of society, especially the young, the aged, the disabled, andusers as well as non-users of the technology. Questions of who pays and who benefits needto be addressed. Analysis focused on access of different people to employment, education,and health care are pivotal societal issues. Analytical methods need to be appropriatelyapplied to the consideration of these societal issues to add scientific rigor in the planning andevaluation of ITS deployment.

Actions already taken, such as the ADA, offer opportunities to more fully meet the needs ofall members of society.

3.8.3 Approach

Program Recommendation

Initially, the program focus is at the national level, followed by regional (large metropolitanareas, corridor communities, mid-sized cities, rural communities) and local assessments.Program definition is recommended for completion in Fiscal Year 1995, with final programelements being shaped by the attributes of the national ITS architecture adopted in mid-1996.Funding is recommended to start in Fiscal Year 1996.

127


Two specific areas need to be addressed:

. Bringing into the ITS planning and evaluation process representatives of the variousstakeholder groups to identify societal issues, needs, and opportunities consistent with ITSoutreach policies.

. Designing a jointly sponsored/funded Federal Government/ITS data collection/researchprogram to develop a predictive assessment of the impacts of ITS deployment.

Activities Underway

The SITF has several activities underway including a symposium on Alterative Futures and aseminar/workshop on Analytical Methodologies to address societal issues. USDOT issponsoring related research through Volpe on ITS Societal Implications: Current Knowledgeand Research Needs, and George Mason University is designing and will conduct a nationalworkshop on societal implications with invited papers.

4.0 CONCLUSION

Widespread application of ITS technologies as a solution to transportation problems shouldnot be taken for granted as a natural evolution. As logical and appealing as harnessingtechnology appears during the years in which ITS evolves, there will be forces which mayindividually or collectively retard deployment. Several categories of challenges and some ofthe associated issues confronting ITS in the long-term have been identified. Recommendedprogram activities are intended to start efforts requiring some level of sustainment during theevolution of ITS. These efforts may, or may not, yield immediate results. Appendix Econtains a schedule of key deployment support activities associated with time-phased programrecommendations.

The challenges and barriers that could, potentially, impede ITS deployment must be dealt withthroughout the ITS program. The near-term barriers present an opportunity to instituteresolutions that will make the 5-year vision presented in Chapter VI, Deployment, possible.Programs enacted to address these near-term issues will form the foundation for some of thelong-term recommendations identified in Section 3 of this chapter. The resolution of thechallenges and barriers presented in this chapter is critical to the successful deployment ofITS.

128

I - NATIONAL ITS PROGRAM PLAN CHAPTER VIII - PROGRAM ASSESSMENT

CHAPTER VIII - PROGRAM ASSESSMENT

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The purpose of program assessment is to provide composite and on-going information on howwell the ITS program is performing relative to key ITS goals and objectives. As such,program assessment is also a principal feedback mechanism for measuring performance of theNational ITS Program Plan (NPP) and providing information to update future NPPs. Programassessment also serves as a major source of data to the ITS America formal Program AdviceMemorandum (PAM) and to the U.S. DOT Annual Implementation Report to Congress. Italso provides a common reference for the public and private sectors to contribute to and useassessment data as they plan and deploy ITS services and products.

As this is the first edition of the NPP, this chapter focuses on the overall approach andimplementation plans for ITS program assessment. It provides a direction for ensuingprogram assessment activities to inform the national ITS program. Subsequent updates of theNPP will contain reports on progress toward achieving the evaluation objectives discussedbelow.

This chapter describes the key features of the program assessment process, the assessment ofobjectives and measures, the implementation of assessment activities, the outputs of programassessment, and the roles and responsibilities of parties involved in the assessment process.

2.0 ASSESSMENT FEATURES

The framework of the ITS Program Assessment are provided in Figure 8- 1. This diagramalso highlights the following principles and features of program assessment.

. Linkage to ITS Goals and Objectives Program Assessment provides a link between thenational ITS goals and objectives and the national ITS program performance. Keymilestone achievements as well as transportation system impacts will be tracked. It alsocalls attention to the need to view the ITS goals and objectives in a broader legislativecontext, such as the use of ITS for intermodal access (as consistent with ISTEA) and forimproved air quality (as consistent with the Clean Air Act (CAA) Amendment).

. Composite View of ITS Activities The NPP covers a broad range of activities includingresearch and development, mode-specific and multimodal ITS development, user serviceintegration, operational tests, system architecture development, and deployment support.The program assessment process synthesizes overall progress of the program along sixdimensions: Milestone Achievement, Effects, Funding and Costs, Acceptance andDeployment, Industry Implications, and International Comparison. A seventh parameter,Other Issues, allows for assessment activities in addition to the six principal categories.

129


stakeholders, including both public and private sectors. The program assessment processmakes use of stakeholder input at each stage and produces outcomes that can be used bystakeholders in their own decision-making processes.

3.0 ASSESSMENT APPROACH

Due to the range and complexity of ITS activities, it is necessary to assess a variety ofparameters. The seven areas below comprise the initial evaluation parameters for the nationalITS program.

. Milestone Progress

. Effects

. Funding and Costs

. Acceptance and Deployment

. System Implications

. International Comparisons

. Other Key Issues

An overview of the program assessment plan based on these seven evaluation parameters, isprovided in Figure 8-2.

3.1 Evaluation Scope

This section provides a description of the scope of each of the seven evaluation objectives.

. Milestone Progress A key area for assessing early success of the ITS program is itsability to make progress on key program milestones. The NPP has provided usefulmilestones for each of the user services. The challenge to program assessment and thenational ITS planning process is to ensure the milestones established are crucial forprogram progress. Milestones that represent key building blocks in the development ofITS should be refined and tracked closely. These milestones will be user service-specific,such as completion of a system design for a national electronic clearance system, as wellas cross-cutting, such as completion of the national ITS architecture development program.

. Effects Determining the effects of ITS services and projects, including benefits andnegative impacts, is a main objective of the national ITS program. Consequently,monitoring of this objective is a necessary evaluation target, and one that is required forthe implementation reports to Congress. The U.S. DOT Annual Implementation Report toCongress contains the U.S. DOT’s assessment of the ITS implementation progress. ISTEArequires that the reports “analyze the possible and actual accomplishments of intelligentvehicle-highway systems projects in achieving congestion, safety, environmental, andenergy conservation goals and objectives of the program”. Additionally, benefits ofeconomic productivity would also be important to monitor due to the commercial andeconomic expectations of the national ITS program.

131


. Funding and Costs The tracking of realized and potential funding and costs of ITSproducts and services has implications for a variety of stakeholders. At the national level,reports of funding would provide a useful indicator of national program support allowingfor international comparisons to be made. Actual, committed and anticipated funding atthe state and local level, as well as the private sector, is also a critical index of support.

The ITS deployment costs will be estimated at several points during the development of anew ITS product or service. Cost-pricing relationships, principally performed by theprivate sector, yield important information on the value of ITS goods and services. Publiccosts are centrally important and are within the public domain, therefore, cost estimationreports from experiences around the country will be provided. These reports could includethe cost to construct, operate, or maintain portions of ITS services. Further, therelationship of costs to benefits will be tracked.

The congressional implementation report also requires monitoring of cost-sharingarrangements involving the federal government, which will be tracked as part of theoverall funding and cost monitoring effort.

. Acceptance and Deployment Public acceptance of ITS products and services will becritical to the implementation of the NPP and, therefore, is an important element inprogram assessment. Both public and private systems will need to achieve the level ofuser acceptance that will allow the program to unfold as expected and planned. Lessonsfrom other areas where technology transfer has been publicly accepted need to beincorporated into these activities and new, innovative techniques will also be required.

The extent and rate of ITS deployment are central measures of the progress the public andprivate sectors are making in implementing ITS services and products, and by implication,the progress towards potential tangible benefits. Data on existing and developing marketsfor ITS services will assist the private sector in understanding how market demand isevolving. Indices of ITS infrastructure deployment would provide a similar understandingfor the public sector on the way in which local agencies are choosing to support ITS.

Non-technical constraints, such as institutional and societal issues can adversely affect therate of deployment. Progress toward resolving these issues would be a part of theassessment process.

. Implications for U.S. Industries As the ITS program evolves, it will offer manyopportunities for applying new technologies to surface transportation. Over time, the ITSprogram will have significant implications for U.S. industries in terms of job creation, newbusinesses, revenues from ITS products and services, and private sector investments. Oneimportant aspect of program assessment will be these affects on U.S. industries. Althoughmost changes will occur in transportation-related industries, important implications in

133


other industries will occur as well. For example, effects of ITS on the emerging“information highway” industries will be considered.

. International Assessment A comparison of the national ITS program relative tointernational developments is another useful factor in program assessment. Items tocompare include levels of public funding, private sector roles, user service orientations,and deployment rates.

. Other Assessment Issues In addition to the six previously mentioned evaluationparameters, other assessment issues will undoubtedly arise and they will be included in theprogram assessment. For example, the progress toward institutional gains and nationalcompatibility will be considered under this seventh evaluation parameter.

3.2 Evaluation Measures

Each evaluation parameter in Section 3.1 has corresponding measures which can be used totrack program performance. Evaluation parameter measures are described in Table 8-3.

Table 8-3 Evaluation Measures

Evaluation EvaluationParameter Subparameter Measures of Performance

Milestone Strategic Measures of attainment for significant user service milestonesProgress Milestones

Crosscutting Measures of attainment for systems architecture development,Milestones operational test completion, etc. that involve multiple user

services

Effects Synthesis ofBenefits andDisbenefits

Measures of impact from operational tests and related modelingstudies; specific benefit measures include: reduction in fatalitiesand injuries (safety), increase in level of service and HOV andtransit usage (mobility), reduction in harmful emissions andenergy consumption (environment), and reduction in user costs(productivity)

Transportation System-wide impacts on performance, impact on achievement ofSystem Impacts clean air mandates, increase in accessibility for disabled groups

134


EvaluationParameter

Funding andcosts

AcceptanceandDeployment

IndustryEffects

International

EvaluationSubparameter

Programsupport

CostEffectiveness

PublicAcceptance

DeploymentPlanning

DeploymentImplementation

Deploymentsupport

U.S. ITSIndustryDevelopment

Other IndustryDevelopment

ComparativePerformance

CooperativePerformance


Measures of Performance

Funding levels by Federal, State, and local organizations, andmeasures of private sector support

Measures on the relationship of incurred or projected costs torealized or expected benefits; reports on significant cost-sharingarrangements

Levels of public acceptance as determined by surveys andmarketing studies being done through various stakeholder groupsin both the public and private sectors

Level of deployment support and planning being conductedacross the country, including, but not limited to, majormetropolitan areas

Levels of deployment for ITS products and services supportedby public and private entities across the county includingsignificant public support and infrastructure market penetrationinformation on private sector services

Reports on institutional and societal innovations and constraintsrealized during deployment of ITS services and products

Number of jobs in ITS, market share of U.S. firms in the userservices, revenue of U.S. firms from ITS products and services,new products on the market

Deployments within specific context of private sectordevelopments, such as emerging multi-media deployments

Comparative measures of U.S. Industry performance relative tointernational development, including areas such as market share,national support, etc.

Assessments of progress on international standard-setting, jointresearch programs, and strategic alliances

135

I --- NATIONAL ITS PROGRAM PLAN CHAPTER VIII - PROGRAM ASSESSMENT


E v a l u a t i o n EvaluationParameter Subpammeter Measures of Performance

Other Issues Institutional New public-private partnerships, streamlining of procurement,Gains progress in outreach, etc.

National User service standards requirements, progress on systemCompatibility architecture development

3.3 Information Sources

Information sources for the evaluation parameters and their corresponding measures must beidentified. The program assessment process will leverage the variety of ITS evaluationactivities already underway. This information will be supplemented with other information, asappropriate, in several phases. The implications of this approach are two-fold.

. A reliance on the development of quality data through other activities.

. Other efforts have to be augmented to serve the needs of national assessment.

The program assessment objectives and the data sources which could produce informationrelevant to the objectives are shown in Figure 8-4. The existing and new information sourcesare described in the following paragraphs.

3.3.1 Existing Sources

On-going evaluation efforts which are relevant to ITS program assessment include:operational test evaluations, modeling studies, data repository establishment, national ITSarchitecture development, and studies.

. Operational Test Evaluations The operational tests are significant activities withimplications for assessment of milestones, benefits, and costs. The evaluation of thesetests will provide important assessment information. For example, the Federal TransitAdministration’s APTS program is conducting a series of evaluation studies based on acoordinated evaluation model. These results will provide useful data on multi-modalservices and benefits realized through their implementation. General guidelines forconducting ITS operational test evaluations are being prepared. These operational testsand their evaluations will provide valuable information for program assessment, however,the required range and quality of data is unknown and needs to be established. As newactivities in this area are commissioned, they can also be designed to fill in gaps inexisting data sources.

136


reporting these results within the context of program assessment can aid in settingexpectations on benefits.

3.3.2 New Data Sources

Supplemental sources of assessment data that need to be developed are described below.

. Milestone Data Currently, there are no available mechanisms for tracking progress towardkey ITS program milestones. A formal mechanism for tracking priority ITS milestonesneeds to be established to supplement existing program assessment data.

. Private Sector Data Given the integral role of the private sector in the ITS program, amechanism for tracking its performance on a variety of the assessment dimensions shouldbe established. Because of the diffuse nature of the private sector, a comprehensiveaccounting of benefits, market penetration, costs, and trends will be difficult. However,private sector data is necessary for the program assessment to encompass both public andprivate performance. ITS AMERICA could draw upon its public and private sectormembership to compile and organize industry data on private sector achievements.

. State and Local Public Sector Activities An increasing amount of data will be neededfrom public sector sources, such as state, regional, and local transportation authorities toassess deployment and its impacts on intended benefits, costs, and system implications.This information should be obtained in a cost-effective manner that keeps additionaladministrative paperwork to a minimum.

. Special Studies As the program assessment process is implemented, special studies willbe required to provide assessment data not available otherwise.

4.0 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN FOR ASSESSMENT ACTIVITIES

An assessment workshop hosted by ITS America will be held periodically as a mechanism forgathering and evaluating progress and performance information. A report on results of theworkshop will provide a reference for updating the NPP, for use by ITS AMERICA indeveloping its program advice to the U.S. DOT, and by the U.S. DOT in the ImplementationReport to Congress. The assessment report will also provide many other interested partieswith information to aid decision-making. In future years, as evaluation results becomeavailable, the workshop will provide a useful way for synthesizing these findings.

138


5.0 OUTPUTS OF PROGRAM ASSESSMENTS

5.1 Assessment Reports

The assessment process is structured so that a draft of the assessment report can be generatedlargely from the workshop and the papers and studies presented therein. This product willthen be used by the various stakeholders as described previously.

5.2 Implications for NPP Process

The program assessment process is one feedback mechanism by which the NPP is modifiedand updated. The periodic assessments should contain information that would be useful inidentifying specific recommendations for the NPP. The unique contribution of the programassessment process will be its attention toward obtaining credible and independent data onprogram achievements that can be used by stakeholders in their assessment of priorities.

5.3 Implications for Public and Private Sector Investment Decisions

The program assessment findings will have implications for public and private sectorinvestment decisions. Specifically, the program assessment document will be a referencedocument to inform the public and private sectors on how the program is developing, muchlike the U.S. DOT’s Conditions and Status Report. The program assessment will provide datawith which the public and private sectors will evaluate assumptions and premises used tojustify additional ITS implementation.

6.0 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

A successful assessment of the national ITS program will require the cooperation and supportof the various ITS stakeholder groups, including the U.S. DOT, ITS America, and otherpublic and private sector organizations. The roles and responsibilities of each of theseparticipants are evolving as the ITS program moves forward, and they will continue to evolveover time. However, it is important that roles and responsibilities be identified early to ensurethat a comprehensive program assessment is performed.

6.1 The U.S. Department of Transportation

Because the U.S. DOT is responsible for managing the Federal ITS program, it has the overallresponsibility, access to information, and potential resources to manage and conduct keyelements of the program assessment. Moreover, the U.S. DOT has the responsibility toproduce an Annual Implementation Report to Congress. Within U.S. DOT, establishment ofthe Joint Program Office for ITS enhances coordination throughout the department.

139


6.2 ITS America

As an advisory committee with broad based private industry, as well as public sectormembership, ITS America is well-positioned to compile and organize industry data that couldprovide independent evaluations of private sector achievements. Information on the natureand magnitude of existing and potential ITS markets could be included. These data will beinstrumental in assessing progress of the overall national ITS program. ITS America couldmake recommendations in the following areas:

. Program Definition/Content

. Program Development

. Program Integration

. Deployment Planning

- Program Advocacy- Resourcing the Program. Program Evaluation

ITS America’s committee on Benefits, Evaluation and Costs will play a vital role in helping todevelop the information necessary for an assessment of the program. This committee willhost the assessment workshops.

6.3 Other Public and Private Sector Organizations

Mechanisms should be developed by both the U.S. DOT and ITS America to ensure that stateand local agencies, private firms, public interest and other organizations, the academiccommunity, and private individuals can comment on the ITS program assessment. Forexample, draft assessment reports should be released to interested parties for comment.

7.0 CONCLUSION

ITS Program Assessment evaluates how well the ITS program is performing relative to theITS goals and objectives. Program assessment results will be used as a source of data for theITS America formal PAM, the U.S. DOT Annual Implementation Report to Congress, and theNPP. Also, program assessment data will be valuable to public and private sectorstakeholders who are making investment decisions on future ITS deployments. Parametersused to assess performance include progress toward milestones, funding levels, costs, publicacceptance, extent and rate of deployment, U.S. industry implications, and internationalcomparisons. Some sources of assessment data are in place today, such as operational testevaluations, modeling results, and the national ITS architecture program. Other sources ofinformation will need to be developed such as milestone data and data from public andprivate sectors. Program assessment is designed to be a complete and on-going mechanismfor measuring the progress of the ITS program toward achieving its goals.

140

I - NATIONAL ITS PROGRAM PLAN APPENDICES

APPENDICES

141

I - NATIONAL ITS PROGRAM PLAN APPENDIX A- PLAN REVIEWERS AND CONTRIBUTORS

APPENDIX APROGRAM PLAN REVIEWERS AND CONTRIBUTORS

Reviewers

Well over two hundred individuals and organizations participated in the review of the Plan.In some cases, reviewers offered general suggestions, in other cases, they offered majorsections of text to be inserted into the Plan. Their participation was invaluable in producingthe document as it appears today. The participants we were able to identify by name arelisted below. If anyone was inadvertently left off this list, please accept our thanks forparticipating and our apologies for not properly acknowledging your effort.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Troy Abel, George Mason University

Allard, Suzanne, EDSMary Ameen, New Jersey Highway

Wally Albers,Albers Systems;

Authority;Nancy Anderson, TRW/ASG;

David Albright, Alliance for Transportation

Timothy Archdeacon, Allied Business

Research

Intelligence;Joseph Armijo, Montana State University;Ronald Baker, Chicago Transit AuthorityMathew Barth, University of California;Jerry Bastarache, ITS America;Jerry Baxter, CALTRANS;Salvatore Bellomo, Bellomo-McGee, Inc;Brian Benson, George Mason University;Gene Bergoffen, National Private TruckCouncil;John Bestgen, US DOT -FHWA;Chip Bishop, APTAStanley Blouin, George WashingtonUniversityJames Bourg, AT&T Bell laboratoriesSadler Bridges, Texas TransportationInstitute;Ray Briggs, Ray Briggs International;Kirk Brown, Illinois DOT;Thomas Bryer, Pennslyvania DOT,Joseph Canny, U.S. DOT;Chalmers Carr, Allied Signal TechnicalCorp;E.R. Case, Case & Associates (IEEE);David Caskey, Sandia National Labs;Bryan Cave for NYNEX Corporation;

.

.

.

.

.

.

.**....

142

Mel Cheslow, Mitre;Thomas Christoffel, Lord Fairfax PlanningDistrict Commission;Bruce Churchill, RMSL Traffic Systems,Inc.,Christopher Cluett;Clay Collier, SEI Technology Group:Gerry Conover, Ford Motor Company;Patrick Conroy, Caltrans;Thomas H. Culpepper, AmericanAutomobile Association;Fred Cwik, ITS America:Larry Dames, US DOT -FHWA;Thomas Deen, TRB;Edward DeLozier, Integrated Toll Systems;Jude Depko, New Jersey HighwayAuthority;Frank DeRose Jr., Michigan DOTKen Digges;Thomas Dingus, University of Iowa;James Dodd, RMSL Traffic Systems, Inc;Frank Dorrance, Amtech;Deborah English, US DOT -FHWA,Bob Ervin, University of Michigan;Paul Green, University of Michigan;Paul Fancher, University of Michigan;Gene Farber, Ford Motor Company;Lee Feldman, Peters & Feldman Co.;Ronald Fisher, US DOT - FTA;William Fiste, Commercial Vehicle SafetyAlliance;Victoria Fore, IVHS Consortium;Robert Franklin,TRW;Andrew Freedman, Wyoming DOT;Mark Freedman, WESTAT;

I - NATIONAL ITS PROGRAM PLAN APPENDIX A- PLAN REVIWERS AND CONTRIBUTORS

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Robert French, Robert L. French &Associates;Mike Freitas,US DOT -FHWA;Douglas Funke, Arvin CalspanCorporation;Haruki Fujii, Assoc of Elec Tech for AutoTraffic & Driving;Bernard Galler, University of Michigan;Craig Gardner, JHK & Associates;Michael Garofalo, New Jersey HighwayAuthority;Valerie Gawron, CALSPAN Corporation;Jonathan Gifford, George MasonUniversity;Keith Gilbert, Automobile Club ofSouthern California;Goode, Larry, North Carolina DOTCharles Goodman, US DOT -FHWA;Edward Green, Ford Motor Company;Thomas Griebel, Texas DOTPhyllis Guss;Herman Haenel Advanced TrafficEngineering:Carol Halpeny, KSI;Jonathan Harkins, Texas Instruments;William Harris, Texas TransportationInstitute;Hollister Hartman;Lawrence Hauben, Lockheed IMS;Edd Hauser, North Carolina DOT;D.O. Helmick, California Highway Patrol;Loyd Henion, Oregon DOT,Milton Heywood, US DOT -FHWA;Cliff Hickel, Northrop Grumman Corp.Anthony Hitchcock, PATH;Antoine Hobeika, Virginia Tech:James Hobson, National EmergencyNumber Association;James Hogan, FHWA-Iowa;Thomas Horan, George Mason University:Avram Horowitz, General MotorsCorporation:David Hubbell, The Mali Trading Co.,Ltd.;Kenneth Huber, AT&T Bell Laboratories;Andrew Hughes, FHWA, Region 4;Melissa Hulse, University of Iowa;William Hyman, The Urban Institute;Leslie Jacobson, Washington State DOT;

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Jeanne Janes, Anderson Advertising;Henry Jasny, Advocates for Highway andAuto Safety;Gloria Jeff, US DOT -FHWA;George Johannessen;Christine Johnson, US DOT - JPO;Anthony Kane, US DOT -FHWA;James Kemp, New Jersey Transit;Linda Kent, United States TelephoneAssociation;Stephen Kercel, Oak Ridge NationalLaboratories:Jon Kessler, Environmental ProtectionAgency;Allan Kirson, Motorola;Paul Klapproth, Siemens Automotive;Thomas Klingham;Ronald Knochart, Siemans Automotive;Les Kubel, Caltrans;Steve Kuciemba, Maryland DOT;Dennis Lebo, Pennsylvania DOT,Robert Legatt, Delco Electronics;Eva Lemer-Lam, The Palisades Consult.Group, Inc.;Joseph Ligas, Illinois DOT,Gordon Linton, US DOT - FTAMike Lovejoy, Wisconsin DOT,Marcia Lowe, World Watch Institute;Wesley Lum, Caltrans;Robert Maki, Michigan DOT;Thomas Marchessault, USDOT;Joel Markowitz, Oakland MetropolitanTransp. CommissionChristopher Marcus, MassachusettsHighway Dept.;John Mason, Jr., Pennslyvania State Univ.;Suzanne Mattenson, Bell Atlantic;John May, IEEE;Thomas Maze, Iowa Transportation Center;Theodore McConnell, US DOT -FHWA;Walter McCormick, Nynex Corporation;Jonathan McDade , US DOT -FHWA;Michael McGurrin, Mitre Corporation;Cynthia McMullen, Houston Metro:Jack McNulty, EDS;Jolene Molitoris, FRA;Martin Monahan, US DOT -FHWA,Region 5;David Morehead, AT&T Bell Laboratories;

143


.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.l

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

l

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Cindi Moreland, Motorola, Inc.;Sid Morrison, Washington State DOT;Peter Nelson, University of Illinois atChicago;David Newbum, U.S.DOT;Mark Norman, Institute of TransportationEngineers;Daniel Noxen, Jew Jersey HighwayAuthority;C J. O’Connell, Caltrans;Gene Ofsttead, Minnesota DOT;Ken Orski, Urban Mobility Corporation;Edith Page, Bechtel Group, Inc.;George Parker, NHTSA;Robert Parsons;Raman Patel, New York City DOT;Barry Pekilis, Minstry of TransportationOntario;Robert Pitcher, American TruckingAssociationRichard Place, Mazda;William Powers, Ford Motor Company;Vincent Pearce, Allied Signal Inc.;Randall Pearson, ITS America:Heman Pena, Jr., City of Charleston SC;Joseph Peters, SAIC;Mary Pigott, ITS America;Robert Pitcher, American TruckingAssociation;Phyllis Radlinski, Transportation ResearchCenter;Kunwar Rajendra, Michigan DOT;Larry Rasky, Rasky & Company;Robert Ratcliff, CALTRANS;James Reed, National Conference of StateLegislatures;James Reichert, TransportationManagement Systems;Michael Repogle, Environmental DefenseFund;James Rillings, General MotorsCorporation;Leroy Robinson, New Jersey HighwayAuthority:Christine Rodriquez, RockwellInternational;Louis Rubenstein;James Russell, Science ApplicationsInternational Corporation;

.

.

.

.

*

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

e

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

144

Joy Sabol, Rockwell, Int’l;Mark Safford, Volpe Center;Chris Saricks Argonne Nat'l Lab;Marsha Scherr, Walcoff & Associates;James Schultz, New Jersey HighwayAuthority;Steven Shladover, University of CAPATH;Valerie Shuman, SEI Technology Group;Sigmund Silber, Sig Silber & Assoc.;Sivananden, Virginia Tech.;Jonathan Slevin, ITS America;Clark Smith, Motorola;George Smith, CALTRANS;Mike Sobolewski, Minnesota Guidestar;Ross Sorci, IITRI/Maryland Tech Center;William Spreitzer, General MotorsCorporation;John Steams, Navigation Technologies;Russ Steele, TRW, Inc.:Burt Stephens, ITS America;Walt Sutterlin, Ohio State U/TRC, Inc.;Peggy Tadej, Lockheed;Phil Tarnoff, Faradyne Systems, Inc.;Steve Teague, Arkansas State Highway &Transportation Dept.MaryAnn Theriault, City of Portland;K. Thirumalai, TRB;Sam Tignor, US DOT -FHWA;Joseph Tocke, NYDOT;Gary Trietsch, TXDOT,Fred Tucker, Motorola;Roy Turner, US DOT -FHWA,James Van Loben Sels, AASHTOGeorge Vivaret, AAA;Kenneth Voorhies, Farradyne Systems,Inc.;John Vostrez, IVHS Services;Leon Walden, Kentucky TransportationCenter;Charles Wallace, University of Florida;Patricia Waller, University of Michigan;Jerry Ward;Richard Weiland, SEI Technology;Joyce Wenger, Kaman ScienceCorporation;Jerry Werner, Werner Associates;John West, Caltrans;John Wilkins, New Jersey Transit;


. William Wilson, New Jersey Highway . Robert Young, Wisconsin DOT;Authority; . Walter Zavoli, ETAK, Inc.;

. Jean-Luc Ygnace, INRETS France; . Carol Zimmerman, IVHS Marketing.

. Lester Yoshida, TRW, Inc.;

145

I - NATIONAL ITS PROGRAM PLAN APPENDIX B - OPERATIONAL TESTS

APPENDIX B - OPERATIONAL TESTS

Since operational tests will provide critical learning experiences, and in many cases,validation of predictions about service performance features, it is essential that potentialdeployment options be considered with an appreciation of available operational test results.Table B-l lists a sample of on-going operational tests including the evaluation purposes andthe user services implemented. The experience base derived from operational tests willprovide the ITS community with valuable data on technologies and public-private partnershiparrangements. Public and private sector planners should review evaluation reports from thetests yielding results of interest. Reference the U.S. DOT’s Intelligent Transportation Systems(ITS) Projects report for the latest, complete compilation of Operational Test activities andstatus.

Table B -1 Examples of Operational Tests

Operational Test Test Purpose User Services Implemented

Mobile Evaluate mobile surveillance & . En-Route DriverCommunication communication equipment for managing short- Inform ationTest duration situations . Incident Management

Delaware Smart Test collection of fares using a smart card on . Electronic PaymentDART transit Services

California Adaptive Evaluate effectiveness of video traffic . Incident ManagementSignal Control detectors & SCOOT - Traffic Control

Smart Call Box Test addition of traffic sensors to call box . Incident Managementnetwork

TravInfo Test providing traffic information to privateservice providers

. Pre-Trip TravelInform ation

. En-Route DriverInformation

. En-Route TransitInform ation

On-board Test automated recording of travel miles for . Commercial VehicleAutomated Mileage tax purposes using GPS & map matching with Administrative ProcessesTest on-board computers

“Capital” DC Metro Test accuracy and value of passive . Incident ManagementArea Surveillance surveillance using cellular phone dataTest

146




Genesis Tests provision of highway & transit data via . Pre-Trip TravelPCDs Inform ation

. En-Route DriverInform ation

- En-Route TransitInform ation

Integrated Ramp Evaluate integration of ramp metering & . En-Route DriverMetering/Adaptive signal control Inform ationSignal Control . Incident Management

. Traffic Control

Denver, CO Evaluate display of transit information toInformation Display transit locations & companies

e Pre-Trip TravelInform ation

. En-Route TransitInform ation

. Public TransportationManagement

CaliforniaInfrastructureCommunications

Test spread spectrum radio as acommunication infrastructure

- None

San Antonio Evaluate fiber-based communication withsurveillance, signal control & messagedisplays

. Incident Management- Traffic Control

Minnesota TravIink Evaluate use of traffic & transit information + Pre-Trip TravelInform ation

Dynamic Truck Test dynamic messages to display safe truck e En-Route DriverSpeed Warning speeds Inform ation

New York City Evaluate vehicle location applications to . En-Route TransitTravel Inform ation transit information systems Inform ation

. Public TransportationManagement

Idaho StormWarning System

Test ability of visibility sensors & variablemessage signs to warn drivers of poorvisibility conditions


Rappahannock Ride Test Dynamic Route Guidance using multiple . Ride Matching &Share System sources of Traffic Information Reservation

147




ADVANCE Evaluate usefulness of probe data for feedback . Route Guidanceinto mute guidance . Traveler Services

Inform ation

Travtek Test dynamic mute guidance using multipletraffic data sources

. Route Guidance- Traveler Services

Inform ation

FAST TRAC Test large network of integrated traffic control . Traffic Controldevices & driver information devices . En-Route Driver

Inform ation

TRANSCAL Evaluate the benefits of transmitting inter-regional traveler information using variousfixed and mobile user devices



DIRECT Test techniques to provide information totravelers via audio


e En-Route DriverInform ation

148

I - NATIONAL ITS PROGRAM PLAN APPENDIX C - MAPPING OF USER SERVICES TO ITS GOALS

APPENDIX C - MAPPING OF USER SERVICES TO ITS GOALS

The user services were developed to address the ITS goals and objectives. The ITS goalswere originally provided in ISTEA and have been refined in the strategic plans of the U.S.DOT and ITS America. These goals and objectives are discussed in Volume I, Chapter II.

Table C-l maps each user service to its related goals, objectives, and actions supporting theobjectives. The labels across the top list the user services grouped by user service bundle. Ashaded cell indicates that the user service represented in the column of the shaded cell relatesto impemention of the action listed in its row. A blackened cell indicates that the user servicein its column relates to one or more action supporting the objective in that row.

149

I - NATIONAL ITS PROGRAM PLAN APPENDIX D - ITS RF SPECTRUM REQUIREMENTS MATRIX

APPENDIX D - ITS RF SPECTRUM REQUIREMENTS MATRIX

The ITS AMERICA Telecommunications Committee completed a preliminary assessment ofthe Radio Frequency (RF) spectrum requirements for ITS. The Committee identified ITSapplications and their corresponding communications functions, frequency, and bandwidthrequirements. Some of the supporting communications technologies such as FM subcarrier,wireline, cellular, etc. are provided as remarks. The Telecommunications Committee willupdate the matrix when the RF spectrum requirements for the National ITS ArchitectureDevelopment Program, the Automated Highway System, and additional ITS applications areidentified. For traceability to the rest of the National Program Plan (NPP), ITS user serviceswhich could be associated with the ITS applications have been added to the Committee’smatrix. The user services column is preliminary and will be reviewed in more detail prior tothe next edition of the NPP. The RF spectrum requirements matrix is referenced in ChapterIV, National Compatibility and is provided in Table D-l.

161

.E2E

162

I - NA

TION

AL ITS PR

OG

RA

M PLA

NA

PPEND

IX D - ITS R

F SPECTR

UM

REQ

UIR

EMEN

TS h@

TR

IX

167

I - NA

TION

AL ITS PR

OG

RA

M PLA

NA

PPEND

IX D

- ITS RF SPEC

TRU

M R

EQU

IREM

ENTS M

ATR

IX

nformation

Route Guidance

Traffic Control

- Incident Management

- Emergency VehicleManagement

- En-Route DriverInformation

- Intersection CollisionAvoidance

l Automated HighwaySystem

# A total of 6 MHz is required, shared between one- and two-way systems.l System architecture effort requests 50 MHz in each band.l * Total requirement of 5.6 GHz is 75 MHz.

beacon

n-Road andRoadside DetectorReports

Nireline, Radio

5.8 GHz

150-900 MH Occassionally rural willreed radio.

Table D-l ITS RF’ Spectrum Requirements Matrix

I - NA

TION

AL. ITS PR

OG

RA

M PLA

NA

PPEND

IX D

- ITS RF SPEC

TRU

M R

EQU

IREM

ENTS M

ATR

IX

174

I - NA

TION

AL ITS PR

OG

RA

M PLA

NI

APPEN

DIX D

- ITS RF SPEC

TRU

M REQ

LJKREM

ENTS

MM

IUX


APPEND

IX D - ITS RF- SPECTRU

M REQUlREM

ENTS ?@

JRlX


APPENDIX D - ITS RF SPECTRUM REQUIREM

ENTS MATRIX

_’r :.:“* ,

~, ::

. ;>:

,j: ,g

;;. .>

f .

:‘Tyc.;

g?

$g

L,-

IL, ^‘:

II, ,,:

:: :: : I .,:;r

‘,’ .

En-Route Drivernformation

Route Guidance

Traffic Control

Personalized Publicransit

Hazardous Materials

Incident Response

Emergency Vehiclemanagement

Automated Highwayystem

Route Guidance (In-Vehicle)

# A total of 6 MHz is required, shared between one- and two-way systems.l System architecture effort requests 50 MHz in each band.l * Total requirement of 5.6 GHz is 75 MHz.

One-Way Communicationsfrom Traffic ManagementCenter (TMC))

16 kHz[cellular]

Table D-l ITS RF Spectrum Requirements Matrix

I - NATIONAL ITS PROGRAM

PL.ANAPPENDIX

D - ITS RF SPECTRUM REQUIREM

ENTS M

kU-RIX

- En-Route DriverInformation

- Traveler ServicesInformation

- En-Route TransitInformation

- Traffic Control

- Demand Management anOperations

- Public TransportationManagement

Value-Added Data

Variable MessageSign Control

# A total of 6 MHz is required, shared between one- and two-way systems.l System architecture effort requests 50 MHz in each band.*** Total requirement of 5.8 GHz is 75 MHz.

See Changeable MessageSign.)

220 MHz 0.005

Cellular PCS.

Can also be wireline inost areas.]

Table D-l ITS RF Spectrum Requirements Matrix

I - NATIONAL ITS PROGRAM PLAN APPENDIX E - DEPLOYMENT SUPPORT ACTIVITIES SCHEDULE

APPENDIX E - DEPLOYMENT SUPPORT ACTIVITIES SCHEDULE

Figure E-l illustrates the Deployment Support Activities Schedule. The details of theseactivities are discussed in Volume I, Chapter VII, Deployment Considerations.

3.1 Sensor Infrastructure3.3 Market Uncertainty3.4 Operations t Maintenance3.5 Privacy3.7 Partnerships

II Implement as appropriate on a case by case basis

3.2 Standards

Ptioriiy to selected standards development

3.6 Liability1. Government Report

2. Discussions w/insurance industry

1997 1998 1999 & Continue

Figure E-l Deployment Support Activities Schedule

187

I - NATIONAL ITS PROGRAM PLAN APPENDIX F - BIBLIOGRAPHY

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

APPENDIX F - BIBLIOGRAPHY

Advanced Telematics in Road Transport, proceedings of the DRIVE Conference,Brussels, Belgium, February 4-6, 1991, Volumes I and II, Report No. ISBN: 0-444-89043-2. Available from Elsevier Science Publishing Company, Inc., 655 Avenue of theAmericas, New York, New York 10010, (212) 989-5800.

Advanced Vehicle and Highway Technologies, Special Report 232, TransportationResearch Board, National Research Council, 1991. Transportation Research Board,2101 Constitution Avenue, Washington, DC 20418 . (202) 334-3214.

An American Observation of IVHS in Japan, report prepared by Robert B. Ervin of theUniversity of Michigan following the First International Study Mission to Japan inMarch, 1991. Available from the University of Michigan, Transportation ResearchInstitute, 2901 Baxter Road, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 48109-2150, (313) 764-2171.

Applications of Advanced Technologies in Transportation Engineering, proceedings ofthe Second International Conference on Advanced Technologies in Transportation,Minneapolis, Minnesota, August, 1991, published by the American Society of CivilEngineers, 345 East 47th Street, New York, New York, 10017-2398, (212) 705-7276.

Assessment of Advanced Technologies for Relieving Urhan Traffic Congestion,NCHRP Report 340, prepared for the National Cooperative Highway Research Programby Castle Rock Consultants, December, 1991. Transportation Research Board, 2101Constitution Avenue, Washington, DC 20418, (202) 334-3214.

Assessment of Advanced Technologies for Transit and Rideshare Applications, preparedfor the National Cooperative Transit Research and Development Program by CastleRock Consultants, July, 1991. Available from Transportation Research Board, 2101Constitution Avenue, Washington, DC 20418, (202) 334-3214.

Conference Proceedings of the Vehicle Navigation and Information Systems Conference(VNIS), Parts I and II, Dearborn, Michigan, October 20-23, 1991, Report Number P-253,available from the Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc., 400 Commonwealth Drive,Warrendale, PA 15096-0001, (412) 776-4970.

Conference Record of Papers Presented at the First Vehicle Navigation and InformationSystems Conference, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, September 11-13, 1989, available fromIEEE Customer Service Department, l-800-678-4333. Product number CH2-7896.

190


9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

Emerging Concepts and Products for Intelligent Transportation systems. Idea:Innovations Deserving Exploratory Analysis Program, Progress Report 1, September,1994. Available from: Transportation Research Board, National Research Council.

IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, special issue on Intelligent VehicleHighway Systems, February, 1991, available from IEEE Customer Service Department,445 Hoes Lane, Piscataway, New Jersey, 08855-1311, (908) 981-1393.

lTE Journal, November, 1990 issue devoted to IVHS. Available from the Institute ofTransportation Engineers, 525 School Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20024-2729,(202) 554-8050.

IVHS and Vehicle Communications, compendium of papers presented at the 1991 SAEFuture Transportation Technology Meeting, Portland, Oregon, August, 1991, publishedby the Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc., 400 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale,PA 15096-000 1, (412) 776-4970.

Mobility 2000 Presents Intelligent Vehicle Highway Systems, Executive Summary of theMarch 19-21, 1990 National Workshop on IVHS in Dallas, Texas, available fromCommunications Program, Texas Transportation Institute, Texas A&M University,College Station, Texas, 77843-3135, (409) 845-1734.

Outlining a National IVHS Program, prepared for the National Cooperative HighwayResearch Program by Castle Rock Consultants, May, 1991. Available from BusinessOffice, Transportation Research Board, 2 101 Constitution Avenue, Washington, DC20418, (202) 334-3214.

Proceedings of a National Workshop on NHS Sponsored by Mobility 2000, Dallas,Texas, March 19-21, 1990. Available from Communications Program, TexasTransportation Institute, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77843-3135,(409) 845-1734.

SMART HIGHWAYS: An Assessment of Their Potential to Improve Travel, Report tothe Chairman, Subcommittee on Transportation, Committee on Appropriations, U.S.Senate, United States General Accounting Office, May, 1991, available from U.S.General Accounting Office, P.O. Box 6015, Gaithersburg, MD 20877, (202) 275-6241.

Inside IVHS, biweekly newsletter. Available from Waters Information Services, Inc.,P.O. Box 2248, Binghampton, New York, 13902, (607) 770-8535.

191


18.

19.

20.

21.

Safety Opportunities in NHS. July, 1993. American Association of State highway andTransportation Officials, 444 North Capitol Street, NW, Suite 249, Washington, D.C.20001.

Vehicle Electronics Meeting Society’s Needs: Energy, Environment, Safety, proceedingsof the 1992 International Congress on Transportation Electronics, Report Number P-260,October, 1992, published by the Society of Automotive Engineers, 400 CommonwealthDrive, Warrendale, PA 15096-0001, (412) 776-4970.

The Intelligent Highway, newsletter published 11 times a year. Available from Mr.Robert French, 3815 Lisbon Street, Suite 201, Fort Worth, Texas 76107, (817) 731-2711.

Primer on Intelligent Vehicle Highway Systems, August 1993, Transportation ResearchCircular, Report Number 412. Available from Business Office, Transportation ResearchBoard, 2101 Constitution Avenue, Washington, DC 20418, (202) 334-3214.

ITS AMERICA PUBLICATIONS

The following publications are available from: ITS AMERICA, 400 Virginia Avenue, S.W.,Suite 800, Washington, D.C. 20024-2730, (202) 484-2906.

1. ATMS: Seven Steps to Deployment.

2. A Comparison of IVHS Progress in the United States, Japan, and Europe Through 1993.Prepared by R.L. French and Associates. March 3 1, 1994.

3. Federal IVHS Program Recommendations for Fiscal Years 1994 and 1995, October,1992.

4. Guidelines for ATMS. May 1992. #B-ATMS-92-2

5. The Intelligent Vehicle-Highway Society of America’s Research Trip to Japan, April1992, Report No. IVHS-AMER-93-1, January, 1993.

6. ITS AMERICA, the official monthly newsletter publication.

7. IVHS Architecture Development Program. Interim Status Report, April, 1994.

8. IVHS JOURNAL: R&D, Operational Testing, and Deployment of Intelligent Vehicle-Highway Systems, scholarly refereed publication, published quarterly. Available from:

192


9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

Gordon and Breach Science Publishers, Customer Service Department, PO Box 786,Cooper Station, New York, New York 10276, (800) 545-8398 or (212) 206-8900, ext246.

IVHS Safety and Human Factors Considerations, May 1992. #M-ATMS-92-1

IVHS REVIEW. Overview pieces on major IVHS topics, published quarterly.Available from ITS AMERICA.

Moving toward Deployment, Proceedings of the 4th Annual IVHS AMERICA Meeting,Atlanta, Georgia, May, 1992.

Stmtegic Plan for Intelligent Vehicle-Highway Systems in the United States, Full Reportand/or Executive Summary, May, 1992.

Surface Transportation and the Information Age, Proceedings of the IVHS AMERICA1992 Annual Meeting, Newport Beach, California, May, 1992.

Surface Transportation, Mobility, Technology, and Society, Proceedings of the 3rdAnnual IVHS AMERICA Meeting, Washington DC, 1993.

Resource Guide for IVHS Contracting With Federal, State, and Local GovernmentAgencies.

Will IVHS Transform Transportation System Effectiveness? Proceedings of a Workshopon Guidelines for Estimating Impacts, Benefits of IVHS. October,

1993, #B 93-4.

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION PUBLICATIONS

The following publications are available from the Federal Highway Administration, HTV-10,Washington, D.C. 20590, (202) 366-2196.

1. Department of Transportation’s IVHS Strategic Plan: Report to Congress, December,1991, describing DOT’s program delivery process and planned activity for the next fiveyears and beyond.

2. Intelligent Vehicle Highway Projects, February, 1993; March, 1994. One pagedescriptions of all IVHS research projects sponsored by the U.S. DOT. Publishedannually.

193


3. Intelligent Vehicle Highway Systems: A Public/Private Partnership, An Overview of theIVHS Program Through FY 1991, prepared for the Federal Highway Administration bythe MITRE Corporation, October, 1991.

4. Intelligent Vehicle Highway Systems Slide Presentation, set of 105 slides withaccompanying script. Available on a loan basis from the RD&T Publications ReportCenter, Federal Highway Administration, Turner Fairbank Highway Research Center,6300 Georgetown Pike, McLean, Virginia 22101, (703) 285-2144.

5. IVHS: Technologies for Transportation, VHS-format videotape released July 1992.

6. The NHTSA IVHS Plan, June 12, 1992. The Natonal Highway Traffic SafetyAdministration, U.S. Department of Transportation.

194

I - NATIONAL ITS PROGRAM PLAN APPENDIX G- GLOSSARY

APPENDIX G - GLOSSARY

The following Glossary is in two parts. Part I contains a list of terms, concepts, andacronyms used in discussions of ITS including selected acronyms for project and programnames, organizations, ITS technologies and functions. Part II contains a limited list ofelectronics and communications terms and concepts.

PART I: GENERAL ITS TERMS, CONCEPTS AND ACRONYMS

AAA

AASHTO

ADIS

ADVANCE

Advantage I-75

AHAR

Ah-Scout

AMTICS

AMTA

ANSI

AP

APTA

American Automobile Association

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

Advanced Driver Information Systems; original name for ATIS

Advanced Driver and Vehicle Advisory Navigation ConcEpt (Chicagoarea); Largest current IVHS project [5000 cars, $40M, 300 sq. mi.] Driveradvisory, in-vehicle guidance, traffic probing, GPS; partnership of Motorola,Illinois DOT, Illinois University Transportation Research Consortium,USDOT

Project on interstate from Canada to Miami, uses decentralized trafficmanagement, CVO.

Advanced Highway Advisory Radio; a system whereby special radioreceivers tune themselves to stations carrying traffic, safety, or otherinformation when necessary.

See Euro-Scout.

Advanced Mobile Traffic Info & Control System on local roads sponsoredby National Police Agency (see VICS). Japan.

American Mobile Telecommunications Association

American National Standards Institute; standards for the computer industry

Administrative Processes- Commercial Vehicle Operations

American Public Transit Association

195


APTS Advanced Public Transportation Systems; FHWA/FTA-funded initiativesinvestigating better use of existing commuter transport methods. [Also aprogram area.]

APTS

ARI

ARI

ARSI Automated Roadside Safety Inspection for commercial vehicles.

ARIES Automobiles’ Roadside transceiver Infrastructure for Extensive Services.Japan.

ARTBA

ASA

ASCE

ASG

ASTM

ARTS

ATA

ATIS

ATMS

ATT

Advanced Public Transportation Systems; also refers to specific FHWA-funded projects to make better use of existing commuter transportationmethods.

Autofahrer Rundfunk Information; German radio service; a 57kHz FMsubcarrier signal alerts receiver that selected station carries trafficinformation; precursor to RDS-TMC

Autofahrer Rundfunk Information; a German radio system that transmits anFM subcarrier code to equipped receivers indicating if a station carriestraffic information.

American Road and Transportation Builders Association

American Statistical Association

American Society of Civil Engineers

Automotive Sciences Group

American Society for Testing & Materials (manufacturing tradeorganization)

Advanced Rural Transportation Systems

American Trucking Association

Advanced Traveler Information System

Advanced Traffic Management System

Advanced Transport Telematics; European counterpart to ATIS and relatedtechnologies; the focus of DRIVE II (cf)

196


Autoguide

AUVS

AVC

AVCS

AVI

AVL

AVM

Bus Info

CACS

CARIN

CDL

CDLIS

CEC

CEN

CMSNMS

COMPASS

London area route guidance project, originally based on Euro-Scout system,now under revision

Association of [alternatively, Autonomous] Unmanned Vehicle Systems;heavy DoD DARPA, NASA (and related contractor) representation; followsand reports on work being done with autonomous and remotely piloted air,sea, and ground vehicles

Automatic Vehicle Classification

Advanced Vehicle Control Systems

Automatic Vehicle Identification

Automatic Vehicle Location

Automatic Vehicle Monitoring

Displaying bus arrival/destination information at bus stops

Japan. Comprehensive Automobile Communication System (1973-79), $70million funded experiment in mobile twoway digital communications forroute guidance; led to the founding of JSK (IVHS/A-like association of 57companies)

CAR Info and Navigation system; an in-vehicle navigation aid developedby Philips

Commercial Driver’s License (Nationwide standard trucker identification)

Commercial Driver License Information System (See CVO User Services inVolume II .)

Commission of the European Community

EC standards body, similar in function to ANSI

Changeable (or Variable) Message Signs

Incident Management/Driver Information program; Highway 401 in Ontario,Toronto area

197


COPDRIVE

CORRIDOR

Crescent

CTIA

CVO

DEMETER

DE SmrtCmmtr

DGPS

DIRECT

DRIVE I

DRIVE II

ENTERPRISE

Cooperative Driving; a PROMETHEUS project investigating some AVCS-type technologies

Cooperation On Regional Road Informatics Demonstrations On Real sites;major DRIVE II ATIS initiative

CVO HELP/AVI project in a crescent-shaped corridor from SW Canadathru CA, to Houston TX [$80M/10 yrs.]

Cellular Telephone Industry Association

Commercial Vehicle Operations

Digital Electronic Mapping of European TERritory EUREKA-sponsored,Philips/Bosch project to spec digital map data standards

Ridesharing system in Delaware.

Differential GPS (cf.); land station based method for improving GPSaccuracy and/or getting around DOD-imposed Selective Availability (S/A)encryption; effort by the Coast Guard to build coastal infrastructure; claimsof 1 to 2 cm accuracyDriver Information Experimenting with Communication Technology; ATIS(HAR, cellular) in downtown Detroit to Metro airport.

Dedicated Road Infrastructure for Vehicle safety in Europe; EC-supportedconsortium of European governments, industry, and universities to conductresearch aimed at improving highway safety, air quality, and increasingmobility; results will be applied in DRIVE II

The second, just-beginning phase of DRIVE; after projects are selected forfunding, approx. $151 million will be available for 50 or so majoroperational tests of ATT (Advanced Transport Telematics) throughoutEurope for the next several years

Electronics Industry Association

Evaluating New Technologies for Roads Program Initiatives in Safety andEfficiency; consortium of states (Arizona,Colorado,Iowa,Minesota) for rapiddevelop/deployment of IVHS technologies

198


ERGS

ERTICO

ETSI

ETTM

EUREKA

EURO-SCOUT

FAME

FAST-TRAC

FCC

FHWA

FMCS

FTA

GIS

GLONASS

GMRL

Electronic Route Guidance System; the first attempt, in the 6O’s/7O’s, at anin-vehicle router, based on loop communication at every intersection toprovide directions to the next node. Every intersection was uniquely coded.

European Road Telematics Implementation Coordination Organization;nascent organization intended to coordinate EC IVHS effort, spanningPROMETHEUS, DRIVE, and the member nation Ministries of Transport

European Telecommunications Standards Institute

Electronic Toll & Traffic Management (applications area for AVI)

EC (European Technology Ministry) cooperative R&D program toencourage private sector collaboration among 19 countries; runsPROMETHEUS program

Infrastructure-based route guidance system using infrared beacons;successful operational test completed in Berlin; Seimens/Blaupunkt

Freeway and Arterial Management Effort (Seattle, WA)

Faster And Safer Travel/Traffic Routing & Advanced Control; trafficmgmt etc. Oakland County, MI.

Federal Communications Commission; handles CIVILIAN requests forradio spectrum; allocations and allotments

Federal Highway Administration (USDOT)

Fleet Management & Control Systems

Federal Transit Administration (USDOT)

Geographic Information Systems; software/database/display systemscontaining highly accurate detailed geographic data for a variety ofapplications; most are based on US Government TIGER files compiled bythe Census Bureau and the US Geological Survey

Soviet GPS, constellation unfinished (12 out of 24 satellites are up); manyGPS receivers can now pick up GLONASS satellites as wellGeneral Motors Research Laboratories

199


GPS

Guidestar

HAR

HAZMAT

HELP

HOV

HUD

HUFSAM

IBTTA

IEEE

IDEAS

ITS.

IGOR

IMIS

INFOBANQ

Global Positioning System, DoD satellite constellation (16 now, eventually21 & 3 spares) that allows receivers to get a position fix (3 channel receivernecessary to compute lat and long, 4+ gets you altitude also) to a fine (andselectively variable) degree of accuracy (see DGPS)

Twin Cities (Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota) coordinated ATMS, ATISprogram

Highway Advisory Radio; dedicated radio frequencies carrying trafficinformation; roadside signs direct travelers to tune to the appropriatestation; usually 530kHz in US

Hazardous Materials

Heavy vehicle Electronic License Plate; CVO component of the Crescentproject

High-Occupancy Vehicle; a designation used to restrict certain lane accessto cars with multiple occupants, usually during freeway rush hours

Head-Up Display; windshield-reflected or other in-vehicle displayequipment that allows driver to keep eyes forward

Highway Users Federation for Safety and Mobility; represents highway(construction) related industries

International Bridge, Tunnel, and Turnpike Association

Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers

Innovations Deserving Exploratory Analysis Program for IVHS funds smallprojects that would provide radically different and new approaches toManaged by TRB.

Interactive Guidance On Routes

NYSDOT (Long Island) Integrated Motorist Information System, major partof INFORM project

Driver info (pretrip) project, USDOT & Texas State Dept. Highways andPublic Transport.

200


INFORM

IRAC

ISATA

IS0

ITE

ITS AMERICA

ITU

IVRG

IVSAWS

LISB

MAGIC

Mobility Mngr

Mobility 2000

MAO

NAVSTAR

NCHRP

INformation FOR Motorists (NY State DOT); Long Island highways driverinfo project; VMS, ramp metering

Inter-departmental Radio Advisory Council; handles GOVERNMENT radiospectrum management, division of NTIA (cf.)

International Symposium on Automotive Technology & Automation (annualconference in Florence)

International Standards Organization

Institute of Transportation Engineers

(or ITS/A) Intelligent Transportation Society of America, group ofgovt/industry/academic people with international representation to work onstandards and issues in North American ITS; now has official FederalAdvisory Committee status

International Telecommunications Union

In-Vehicle Route Guidance System

In-Vehicle Safety Advisory and Warning System; contract with HughesElectronics to develop radio beacon type warning system for incidents,emergency vehicles, etc.

Ali-Scout trial, Berlin.

Metropolitan Area Guidance, Information & Control; uses surveillance andHAR, VMS, ramp metering. New Jersey, Rte. 80.

intra-city rideshare matching

Original govt/industry/university consortium/committee to define IVHSareas and issues (predecessor of IVHS AMERICA)

Metropolitan Planning Organization (local urban transportation planningauthori ties)

NAVigation Satellite Timing And Ranging system; another name for GPS(cf)National Cooperative Highway Research Program; program of TRB-administered/partially funded research projects

201


NEMA

NHTSA

NIST

NTIA

NTSB

OBC

OECD

PAMELA

PANDORA

PATH

Pathfinder

PEGASUS

PIARC

POLIS

National Electrical Manufacturers Association (the traffic control/signalingequipment industry)

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (USDOT)

National Institute for Standards in Technology

National Telecommunications and Information Administration; Dept ofCommerce bureau that handles all communication. standards & allocations;parent of IRAC

National Transportation Safety Board; Federal independent agency,conducts accident investigations & safety studies, makes recommendationsto manufacturers, govt. regulatory agencies, et al.

On-Board Computer

Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development

(EC) Pricing and Monitoring Electronically of Autos; AVI/ETTM effort aspart of DRIVE in Europe

EC digital road mapping project

Partners for Advanced Transit and Highways (U. Berkeley, Caltrans); lot ofwork on AVCS

In-vehicle guidance/traffic probing project on 12 miles of Santa MonicaFreeway, surrounding arterials; sponsored by GM, Caltrans, FHWA, Etak

People, Goods, and Services Urban System (Texas)

Permanent International Association of Road Congresses

Promoting Operational Links with Integrated Services; interurban driverinfo services major operational test project within DRIVE II

PROMETHEUS PROgraMme for European Traffic with Highest Efficiency &Unprecedented Safety; broad consortium of countries & IVHS projects

RACS Road-Automobile Communications Systems sponsored by Ministry ofConstruction (see VICS), Japan

202


RDS

RSPA

SAE

SAFER

SCATS

SCOOT

SHRP

Sign1 Preempt

SmartCard

Radio Data System (Europe); uses FM subcarrier to alert equipped receiversto incoming traffic info

Research and Special Programs Administration (USDOT); handles hazmat,statistics, etc.

Society of Automotive Engineers

Safety and Fitness Electronic Records System (See CVO User Services inVolume II.

Sydney Coordinated Adaptive Traffic System; Australian integratedautomated signaling system for urban traffic management

Split, Cycle, and Offset Optimization Techniques; British traffic signalcontrol system

Strategic Highway Research Program; develops/promotes advancedconstruction/maintenance methods

Chicago, et. al., using AVL for busses and allowing mass transit to interrupttraffic signals for better schedule reliability

Ann Arbor Mobility Manager

SmartCommuter CA, TX CATV/radio-based commuter information services

SOCRATES

SOV

s s v s

STPP

TFHRC

TMC

(EC) System of Cellular Radio for Traffic Efficiency and Safety; uses asingle-frequency broadcast to vehicles, multiple access protocol for responses

Single Occupancy Vehicle; driver with no passengers

Super Smart Vehicle System, an AVCS effort. Japan.

Surface Transportation Policy Project

Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center (FHWA R&D)

Traffic Message Channel (with RDS); transmits, on FM subcarriers, digitalcodes representing standardized traffic info messages to be decoded anddisplayed (or spoken) in any given language by in-vehicle receiver.

203


TMI/FOC Traffic Management Information/Fleet Operation Coordination; AnaheimCA, on/off board integrated information services for truckers

TNRDA Transit Network Route Decision Aid; Software to assist phone operators inadvising urban travelers

TRB

TRIP

TRRL

Transportation Research Board

The Road Information Program; citizen’s group to monitor roadways

Transportation Road Research Lab; run by UK government, soon to beprivatized

TSC Transportation Systems Center; see VNTSC

Trafficmaster London area pager-based navigation aid and positioning service, including250 IR traffic sensors; 1600+ subscribers

TRANSCOM Transportation Operations Coordinating Committee; NY/NJ metro areaorganization striving for poly-institutional unity on IVHS issues , includingAVI, ETTM, etc.

TravTek In-vehicle guidance&routing, yellow pages, traffic info, probing, integratedinfrastructure; partnership of GM, AAA, FlaDOT, FHWA, Orlando [$12M,several yrs]. Orlando, FL project

UMTA Urban Mass Transportation Administration (former USDOT agency, now theFederal Transit Administration)

UMTRI Univ Michigan Transportation Research Institute

VIDS

VNIS

VA “University Corridor” Adding special IVHS testbed lane to new VA highway (UVA-VaTech); [$95M]

VICS Vehicle Information & Communications System; integrated successor toAMTICS and RACS; vehicle-roadside communication, in-vehicle navigation& route guidance. Japan.

Video Imaging Detection System (federally initiated AVCS machine visioneffort)

Vehicle Navigation & Information Systems. Annual IEEE sponsoredconference.

204


VNTSC Volpe National Transportation Systems Center; the ‘other’ research wing ofFHWA, located in Cambridge, MA

VORAD Vehicle Onboard RADar; for collision avoidance

VRTC Vehicle Research and Test Center, East Liberty OH

WADS Wide Area Detection System; an image processing based vehicle detectionalgorithm, precursor to VIDS

WARC World Administrative Radio Conference; meets every few years to discussfrequency table issues; ambassadorial and technical delegates

WIM Weigh In Motion

PART II: ELECTRONICS/COMMUNICATIONS TERMS and CONCEPTS

AM Amplitude Modulation; communication method that varies the signalamplitude to represent varying data

ARQ Automatic Repeat Request; an electronic request for retransmission ofcorrupted data

ASCII American Standard Code for Information Interchange; standard table of 8-bitrepresentations of each letter, number, symbol, etc. for inter-machinecommunication

ASK Amplitude Shift Keying; digital AM; logic 0 and 1 are represented by twodiscrete amplitudes of the signal

BW Bandwidth; the range of frequencies needed to transmit a particular signalcoherently; the larger the BW, the more information theoretically that can becarried. Limited by transmission medium and method. In general, digitaltechniques can use less BW than analog for a given message, thus moreinformation per available BW.

BER

BPS Bits per second; basic data communication. rate measurement

C band Portion of the electromagnetic spectrum used primarily for satellite andmicrowave transmission; 4 to 6 GHz

Bit Error Rate; measure of digital communication. system accuracy (whatpercentage of bits are screwed up)

205


CAD Computer Aided Design (engineering), or Computer Aided Dispatching (ofemergency/fleet vehicles)

CCD

CDMA

Charge-Coupled Device; popular TV camera element

Code Division Multiple Access; a spread spectrum digital communication.technique, developed by the military to prevent jamming, also allows forgreatly increased multichannel transmission ability on a single medium bysplitting a particular message up between different frequencies AND timeslots

CD-ROM Compact Disk Read Only Memory

cn Carrier to Interference ratio; ratio of wanted/unwanted signal levels (alsoC/N, Carrier to Noise)

Common Carrier Any authorized supplier of transmission facilities or communication.services to the general US public

Companding Compressing and expanding a signal’s bandwidth for transmission on alimited channel

CPU Central Processing Unit; heart of a computer, hardware that actually executesinstructions

CRC Cyclic Redundancy Check; data communication. error correction method;extra message bits indicate (# of bits)/(some #), which can be verified on thereceiving end

CT2

DAB

dBm

DBMS

Second Generation Cordless Telephone; digital wireless phone systemproposed and implemented in UK first, adopted with modifications by EC

Digital Audio Broadcasting; an emerging service, intended primarily for thebroadcast of CD-quality music; can be terrestrial or satellite based and cantransmit data at high rates as well

Decibel referenced to 1 milliwatt; relative strength of a signal measured indB’s (10*log base 10) when the signal power is compared in a ratio to onemW.

Data Base Management System; software that manages information formultiple users

206


DBS

DECT

Diplexer

EHF

EM1

EPROM

fading

FDM/FMA

Firmware

FM

FSK

GHz

GSM

HF

Direct Broadcast Satellite; satellite transmission intended to be receiveddirect into home or building television/data systems; typically, only a small(1 m or less in diameter) dish antenna is required for reception.

Digital European Cordless Telephone; EC cellular, or CT1

A device that prevents the signal transmitted from a transceiver (eg, acellular radio) from interfering with the receiving section of the transceiver

Extremely High Frequency; electromagnetic spectrum range of frequenciesused for microwave transmission, 30-300GHz

Electra-Magnetic Interference; physical phenomenon that accompanies allelectric and magnetic activity, can result in communication. channel noiseand data errors if not guarded against

Erasable-Programmable Read-Only Memory; a ROM chip that can be erasedby X-ray or UV radiation and reprogrammed

loss of radio signal due to transmission range limitations or multipath effects

Frequency Division Multiplexing/Multiple Access; technique that allowssimultaneous communication on multiple channels using one physicalmedium by assigning different frequencies to different communicatingparties

Logic circuits that reside in ROM, but are software-alterable in certaincircumstances

Frequency Modulation; communication. method that represents a varyingsignal with a constant-amplitude wave that varies in frequency around a base(or carrier) frequency that is much higher than that of the signal

Frequency Shift Keying; digital FM--most common method for low speeddata transmission, uses two different frequencies to represent logic 0 or 1

Gigahertz; frequency unit equalling 1 billion cycles/sec

Group Special Mobile; a subcommittee of ETSI that is specifying new pan-European digital cellular system

High Frequency; radio frequency band from 3-30 MHz

207


ISDN

Ka band

Ku band

KHz

L band

LCD

LED

MHz

microwave

MIPS

Modem

MTBF

MTTF/R

multipath

OS1

PCM

PROM

Integrated Services Digital Network; a recent type of digital telephoneservice allowing a user to transmit voice and data simultaneously

Portion of spectrum in 12 to 30GHz range

Portion of spectrum in 10 to 12GHz range, used increasingly for satellitecommunication

Kilohertz; frequency unit equalling 1 thousand cycles/sec

A microwave frequency band used for satellite and microwave, in 1GHzrange.

Liquid Crystal Display; e.g., watches, ‘flat’ displays

Light Emitting Diode

Megahertz; frequency unit equalling 1 million cycles/set

frequencies above about 890 MHz

Million Instructions Per Second; CPU speed performance measuring units

Modulator/Demodulator; common interface between machines and thecommunication. link connecting them; converts data to a form easilytransmissible over (usually phone) lines

Mean Time Between Failures; computing equipment reliability measurement

Mean Time To Failure/Repair; computing equipment longevity measurement

A phenomenon in cellular radio propagation wherein obstacle-reflected radiowaves interfere with direct waves at the receiver, causing signal loss

Open Systems Interconnection; 7-layered suggested model for datacommunication. system configuration, allowing processes to be separatedenough to allow independence from a specific hardware platform

Pulse Code Modulation; a method of digitizing analog data for transmission

Programmable Read-Only Memory; a chip that stores data that is ‘permanent’relative to software. ‘Burning in’ (storage) of data happens aftermanufacture.

208


ROM

SCA

SLMR

SMDS

T1 line

T2 line

TDM/TDMA

Teletext

UHF

VI-IF

VLF

vocoder

VSAT

Read-Only Memory; data storage, the contents of which are not meant to bechanged (written), only accessed (read).

Subsidiary Communications Authorization; FCC regulation concerningsubcarrier FM transmission (Muzak, RDS, etc.)

Special Land Mobile Radio

Switched Multimegabit Data Service; carrier-provided, connectionless,broadband, packet-switched data transmission service offering 1.544 mbs,44.736 mbs, and eventually 155 mbs data rates.

Digital transmission channel (provided by carrier services) rated to 1.544megabits per second; used primarily for short-haul links

Digital carrier facility at 6.312 mbps

Time Division Multiplexing/Multiple Access; technique allowing multiplecommunication. channels on one physical medium by ‘time-sharing’--chopping a message into pieces and sticking each piece into its channel’stimeslot which occurs cyclically

One-way data transmission designed for broadcast of graphics and text, fordisplay on subscriber TV or low-cost terminals

Ultra High Frequency; frequency range from 300MHz to 3GHz; includes TVchannels 14-83 and cellular radio

Very High Frequency; frequency range from 30 to 300MHz, includes mostFM radio and TV channels 2-13

Very Low Frequency; frequency band from 3 to 30 KHz, not very useful forcommunications because of slow data rate and EM1 from electromechanicaldevices

Voice Coder; a device that converts analog speech signals into digital formand vice versa, reduces the bandwidth needed for voice communication.

Very Small Aperature Terminal; an easily accessible satellite communicationservice, now competing with land-based leased lines

209

national its program plan, volume i

Documents